User talk:Mntzr

Welcome

I noticed you were new, and wanted to share some links I thought useful:

For more information click here. You can sign your name by typing 4 tildes, like this: ~~~~.

AIT

Your "correction" to the introuction to the Aryan invasion theory article has ensured that the whole introduction now repeats itself and that an important point has been obscured. Please ensure that you read the whole section - at least - of an article before making alterations. There is a separation between the AIT article and the Indo-Aryan migration article. Paul B 12:20, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. dab (ᛏ) 16:50, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:Kak.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Kak.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL-self}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Dethomas 01:45, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Indian Christianity

Perhaps the deletion of the image needs a little discussion before deleting it out of hand. What is wrong with it? Student7 (talk) 13:39, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

August 2017

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 BRD 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 your 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. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 22:39, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 2017

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Bajrang Dal. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. Kautilya3 (talk) 17:42, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ARBIPA sanctions alert

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Kautilya3 (talk) 16:01, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

December 2017

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Bajrang Dal. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. regentspark (comment) 16:17, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Mntzr reported by User:Kautilya3 (Result: ). Thank you. Kautilya3 (talk) 01:36, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

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 ~~~~}}.

Kuru (talk) 01:48, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

February 2018

You have already been blocked for edit warring, so please don't do this again. Learn to gain consensus for the changes you are making. utcursch | talk 02:18, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Swastika is the common word in English sources

Please stop trying to replace it with something else. If you think you have a policy or guideline based argument, use the talk page. I see you haven't always in the past. Doug Weller talk 11:02, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Placenames

Please stop changing the names of places in articles to different spellings to those used as our article titles, as you did at Kumbh Mela. We use the WP:COMMONNAME in English for our articles, not the "official" names, so changing the spelling can break wikilinks to those articles and is confusing to our readers - thank you - Arjayay (talk) 12:16, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Varavara Rao

Hi! I have reverted your changes made to Varavara Rao as it violates WP:BLP. Please do familiarise yourself with that section. Thanks for your contributions Vikram Vincent 09:29, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Controversial topic area alerts

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. — Newslinger talk 16:14, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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. — Newslinger talk 16:14, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

December 2020

Please stop your disruptive editing. Changing the names of places in articles to different spellings to those used as our article titles, as you did at Allahabad is disruptive. We use the WP:COMMONNAME in English for our articles, not the "official" names. If you think that the article should have a different name than the one it does now, you should wait until August 2021 and then use the article talk page to discuss a potential change of name.-- Toddy1 (talk) 23:04, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you change the creation date of the Bhagavad Gita to some nonsense date, and in only one place (leaving the article in internal contradiction)? Please add that to the list of things to stop. --Fabianlischka (talk) 19:53, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The nonsensical date is what you changed it to. There's plenty of evidence for my date for the Mahabharata, ergo the Bhagavad Gita. Mntzr (talk) 22:00, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Bhagavad Gita, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 03:50, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

January 2021

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Nazi symbolism. Binksternet (talk) 19:48, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

February 2021

This is your only warning; if you remove or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia again, as you did at Love Jihad, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. SUN EYE 1 06:18, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced edits

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, you may be blocked from editing. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 16:44, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]