User talk:Ishraque Hussain

Welcome!

Hi Ishraque Hussain! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! Djm-leighpark (talk) 19:21, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Please do not vandalize the pages otherwise you will be blockedThe cool mew (talk) 19:01, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not vandalize the pages otherwise you will be blocked you will not get next warning The cool mew (talk) 20:06, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 2020

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Djm-leighpark (talk) 19:21, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Grand Mufti. Disruption of article in process of of being edited under ipa/blp discretionary sanctions likely is cause for immediate block by admin Djm-leighpark (talk) 19:40, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Grand Mufti shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djm-leighpark (talk • contribs) 19:57, 21 May 2020 (UTC) Djm-leighpark (talk) 20:15, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at WP:ANI regarding edit warring and attempting to impose POV. The thread is Grand Mufti of India Problems. The discussion is about the topic Grand Mufti of India. Djm-leighpark (talk) 22:17, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Grand Mufti of India (Hindustan) moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Grand Mufti of India (Hindustan), does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.

The only cited source does not directly verify that the given title "Hindustan" applies, and does not verify the thing regarding the seminar. Would need better sources to show that this position is different enough from our already existing Grand Mufti article.

– Thjarkur (talk) 22:17, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Final warning

You are not to create forks to promote your preferred Grand Mufti of India onto Wikipedia. If you do that again, you will be sanctioned without further warning. Thank you. El_C 22:48, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Misuse of minor edits check box

Hi Ishraque Hussain! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor at Asjad Raza Khan that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia — it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. Your edit history shows that you do this quite a bit. It needs to stop.-- Toddy1 (talk) 08:46, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]