User talk:Jiamprem

February 2021

Hello, I'm Phuzion. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Economy of Kolkata—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thanks. Phuzion (talk) 02:45, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Economy of Kolkata, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Donner60 (talk) 02:53, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Many people in Kolkata have given wrong information. I deleted the wrong information, gave the correct information. I am an Indian. Jiamprem (talk) 03:32, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Economy of Kolkata. Your edits could be interpreted as vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use your sandbox. Thank you. Dl2000 (talk) 03:42, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Economy of Mumbai. RA0808 ^talk _contribs 05:15, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

February 2021

Your recent editing history at Economy of Kolkata 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Dl2000 (talk) 05:16, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. — Newslinger talk 06:37, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jiamprem, if you would like to continue editing Wikipedia, please read the simplified ruleset, the verifiability policy, and the guide to dispute resolution, then write an unblock request (using the {{unblock}} template with the instructions above) explaining in your own words:

How to ensure that your content additions to Wikipedia articles are verifiable
How to resolve content disputes on Wikipedia

Thanks. — Newslinger talk 06:45, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]