User talk:Omio Asad

Welcome!

Hello, Omio Asad, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or click here to ask for help here on your talk page and a volunteer will visit you here shortly. Again, welcome! BracketBot (talk) 15:13, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

October 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Serah Singh may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

'''Serah Singh''' (born 3 August 1994)) is an [[India]]n [[bollywood film]] [[actress]].<ref>[http://entertainment.oneindia.in/celebs/

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 15:13, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Omio Asad, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Omio Asad! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Come join experienced editors at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a space where new editors can get help from experienced editors. These editors have been around for a long time and have extensive knowledge about how Wikipedia works. Come share your experiences, ask questions, and get advice from experts. I hope to see you there! Osarius (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 16:35, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person, but you didn’t support your changes with a citation to a reliable source, so I removed it. Wikipedia has a strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 08:09, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

October 2014

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Akshay Kumar has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Akshay Kumar was changed by Omio Asad (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.899052 on 2014-10-28T09:08:46+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 09:08, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Smauritius, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

Hell in a Bucket (talk) 10:35, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons, as you did to Surveen Chawla. Thank you.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:12, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

October 2014

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Deepika Padukone, 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. VeryCrocker (talk) 08:13, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. At least one of your recent edits, such as the edit you made to Deepika Padukone, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at the welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make some test edits, please use the 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. KRIMUK90 ✉ 08:22, 30 October 2014 (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:Omio_Asad reported by User:Kailash29792 (Result: ). Thank you. Kailash29792 (talk) 08:32, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

October 2014

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Deepika Padukone. If you see a note on an article, obey it. In this case, do not an infobox to Deepika's article. It has been decided that the article is best without one. Kailash29792 (talk) 10:48, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for disruptive editing, edit-warring and the continued addition of unsourced material to biographies contrary to policy. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 16:57, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

November 2014

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at 2014 FIFA World Cup. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted or removed.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor then please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
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, until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively could result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. QED237 (talk) 13:04, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Ctg4Rahat. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Rabindranath Tagore, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Rahat (Talk * Contributions) 14:05, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive editing

Please help me understand what was unclear about the message Birth date is contested with multiple dates in multiple reliable sources. Do NOT insert here. Coverage, if included, would cover the conflicting dates. that led you to believe it was appropriate to insert a birth date without providing ANY sources? Your actions appear to be purely disruptive. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 15:07, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

and your edit [1] which contradict the source [2]. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 15:30, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

and please stop changing mf (month first) to df (day first) everywhere, that is also disruptive editing. America lists month first so american articles often have mf. And add sources for your edits. QED237 (talk) 15:33, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

November 2014

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy by inserting unsourced or poorly sourced defamatory or otherwise controversial content into an article or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at Andrew McCollum. QED237 (talk) 15:13, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

December 2014

Please stop adding inaccurate and unreferenced contributions to The Chrysler Building article. Thank you, David J Johnson (talk) 11:21, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have again added incorrect information to The Chrysler Building article. The building you have mentioned was not associated with the Trump Organisation until long after the time of the final construction of the Chrysler Building. Please do not add unreferenced and inaccurate information. You may be blocked from editing if you continue. Thank you, David J Johnson (talk) 15:51, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

January 2015

Hi there! Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. Thanks! 220 of ^Borg 04:23, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have, yet again, inserted incorrect information on the Chrysler Building article. This is you last warning, if you continue you will be blocked from editing. Thank you, David J Johnson (talk) 10:38, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks for the continued addition of unsourced and disputed material to articles despite many warnings and an earlier block for the same disruption, plus your complete refusal to discuss your edits with others. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:48, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've restored your block as you continue to make the same unsourced and contentious edits and still have yet to attempt to communicate with any other editors regarding their concerns. The block is of indefinite length, that is you're blocked until you can demonstrate that you understand why you have been blocked and explain how you will modify your editing to prevent the same situation from arising in the future. Please read the Guide to Appealing Blocks for further guidance.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:20, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]