User talk:Ningalonnichpovuka/Archive 1

July 2022

I noticed that you have posted comments to the page Meditation in a language other than English. At the English-language Wikipedia, we try to use English for all comments. Posting all comments in English makes it easier for other editors to join the conversation and help you. If you cannot avoid using another language, then please provide a translation into English, if you can. If you cannot provide a translation, please go to the list of Wikipedias, look in the list for a Wikipedia that is in your language, and edit there instead of here. For more details, see Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines. Do not add non-English to this encyclopedia. Your source was not about etymology, and not a WP:SECONDARY source. Zefr (talk) 15:59, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

hi i have provided the translation for the Malayalam indic text in english Ningalonnichpovuka (talk) Ningalonnichpovuka (talk) 16:00, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Meditation. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Do not edit war, WP:WAR. Go to the talk page to gain consensus. Zefr (talk) 16:01, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

hi i have added primary sources as you cited source is secondary Ningalonnichpovuka (talk) 16:04, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Meditation 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.
Stop and take a break - your edits are not acceptable. You are in danger of being blocked. Zefr (talk) 16:09, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ok sure! Ningalonnichpovuka (talk) 16:11, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Philosophy sidebar

Hello. I approve changing Averroes with Chanakya, but you need to change the picture as well. Thank you. Trakking (talk) 12:56, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the approval, i have updated the side bar in commons as well. Ningalonnichpovuka (talk)

Moving pages

Please do not move pages to new titles, as you did here, unless there is something obviously wrong the current title. If you think something else is "more appropriate" as a title, initiate a discussion on the article talk page and obtain other editors' views. Wikipedia is a team effort, not a place to push your personal views or preferences. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:53, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Tale of Kodanbharani and Chinese Traveler to Malabar (August 3)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Onmyway22 was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Tale of Kodanbharani and Chinese Traveler to Malabar and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Onmyway22 talk 08:45, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ningalonnichpovuka! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Onmyway22 talk 08:45, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Tale of Kodanbharani and Chinese Traveler to Malabar (August 4)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by KylieTastic was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Tale of Kodanbharani and Chinese Traveler to Malabar and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

KylieTastic (talk) 19:46, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Arif Hussain Theruvath (August 23)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by TheAafi was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Arif Hussain Theruvath and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

─ The Aafī (talk) 18:00, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Tale of Kodanbharani and Chinese Traveler to Malabar

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Draft:Tale of Kodanbharani and Chinese Traveler to Malabar, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Bbb23 (talk) 18:04, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion tagging

Do not speedy tag pages for deletion. You have insufficient experience.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:05, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

the article is not notable Ningalonnichpovuka (talk) 18:05, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Consider this a warning. If you speedy tag a page again, you risk being blocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:08, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ok Ningalonnichpovuka (talk) 18:08, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

last speedy tag you removed was placed before you gave me warnig Ningalonnichpovuka (talk) 18:29, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia: check out the Teahouse!

Hello! Ningalonnichpovuka, you are invited to the Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:29, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ningalonnichpovuka,

If you have questions about policies, guidelines and editing practices on Wikipedia, please bring them to the Teahouse. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:30, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Arif Hussain Theruvath (August 23)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by TheAafi was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

No changes made since the last decline. If you submit this again without making the changes in accordance with the guidelines, it would be possibly rejected.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Arif Hussain Theruvath and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

─ The Aafī (talk) 19:03, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

you dont review this! again and again please Ningalonnichpovuka (talk) 20:56, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

September 2022

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Liger (film), it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Please summarize what the sources say without adding your own commentary. Diff [1] Ab207 (talk) 13:48, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ningalonnichpovuka. Thank you for making an honest effort to improve the encyclopedia. However, please refrain from adding your own analysis by adding random sources like this.

Here, you've added "illogical common Bollywood style story, cringeworthy sequences, poor second half, improper song placements, bad climax, lack of Telugu Cinema nativity and nepotism product Ananya Pandey & her performance as the main reasons for failure", however, the above reasons are not told anywhere in the cited sources, therefore violating WP:SYNTH.

We should only add what sources and nothing else. Please see this edit for an example of how these sources are supposed to be added. Hope this helps. Thanks and regards -- Ab207 (talk) 07:14, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Malabar rebellion. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Do not use WP:PRIMARY sources; read scholarly books and journals to find valid historical content; if you can't do it, leave it alone. Kautilya3 (talk) 18:53, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ARBIPA sanctions alert

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.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. 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.

Kautilya3 (talk) 18:53, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

September 2022

@Ningalonnichpovuka: May I know why did you removed content from Brahmāstra: Part One – Shiva. Please do not blank out or remove content from Wikipedia without any adequate explanation as you did at Brahmāstra: Part One – Shiva. Even though I have not reverted it can you explain why you removed it? Theoder2055 (talk) 15:31, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi , it has been noted from the reviews and ratings that critics has negative review on the movie. Also the source which is privide also says the the film disappointed in the first day. Ningalonnichpovuka (talk) 15:33, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history 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. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 18:57, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]