User talk:SumerianPrince

Welcome

Hello, SumerianPrince, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your edits to the page Kerala have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may be removed if they have not yet been. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles. As well, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Why so serious? ^{Talk to me} 16:15, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A cup of tea for you!

Hello! I know you have a hard time on Wikipedia. Sorry for that. I hope you enjoy editing. I would like bring into your attention that there is a fundamental policy in Wikipedia—Verifiability, not truth. So if you provide reliable citations, those who oppose you now will have to accept you instead. Hope you have a great day. Vanischenum^Talk 18:16, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for edit warring. 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 below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

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. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 19:34, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

SumerianPrince, you've been blocked for edit warring in the past. Unless you can assure us that your behavior will be different in the future, it's likely you will get a longer block this time around. Please respond at the WP:AN3 noticeboard and explain how you will patiently work for consensus in the future. Your usage of an IP as part of an edit war may cause you to be investigated for sockpuppetry. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 17:08, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-Pakistan sentiment is covered by WP:ARBIP

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 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.

This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.

EdJohnston (talk) 18:18, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Padmanabhaswamy Temple

I have added a better tag. The article still reads like a promotional brochure. Edward321 (talk) 14:33, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:39, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding my message on your Talk last month

Hello @SpacemanSpiff. Greetings to you. I am posting this message here on my Talk as your Talk's messages get archived by the month and I did not want to add there further. Also, your role being an Admin's, you may have a profusion of messages. While there is no issue I have at the moment, I just wanted to clarify my side regarding the message I had left on your Talk at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:SpacemanSpiff/Archives/2024/March#New_user_keeps_removing_well-referenced_material_without_ever_talking_either_on_the_Article_Talk_or_anywhere_else., which was last month.

The new user then was removing (not any more) material along with their references with short one-line explanations without looking before or after. One of the edit summaries was where they cite "confusion about currency" which removed multiple references including INDIA TODAY and FORBES MAGAZINE. Did they mean that journalists and other educated people cited/involved/mentioned were “confused” between the Indian Rupee and the American Dollar and especially in that regard (currency related) from the latter?

Anyway all the publicized figures being thrown around viz the smaller five vaults opened so far are pure “guesstimates”. Every little bit of what is on the page is backed up by perfectly reliable and solid references. There must be a reason why its content assessment was promoted to one higher mid-March. I have been on Wiki for a long time. Not long after its inception around the year 2000, I had known of it and come across it, by maybe 2002. I have contributed every time the donation campaigns come. I do feel bad that around 98% of the people actually do not donate almost anything. As I have seen how much work and background stuff goes on between the various editors from the admins through all those in between to the average regular editor without any additional “positions”. The main reason I approached you, both proper and now, is because your mother-tongue is the mother/sister language of my mother-tongue :). Anyway thanks for your time. Regards. SumerianPrince (talk) 09:38, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Edit June 09th) Hello @SpacemanSpiff, I see you have not since Puthendu/Vishu, anyway I just wanted to add some more to what I had posted before for you. It is only wrt the Temple's smaller five vaults (which are all that should be opened for eternity imo) that the "guesstimate" of "Rs 1 lakh crores" has been used. This was the lowest guesstimate as of July 2011 and only UK based rags seem to be still persisting with the same figure whenever they have done of late. Moreover they even divide the figure by the current exchange rate for the INR with the USD Euro or Pound. In July 2011 one of the people who was involved in the matter guesstimated "Rs 5 lakh crores"^[1]. Nine years on in 2020 another one in the SC described it as worth "lakhs of crores"^[2]. Moreover the price of Gold through most of 2011 was Rs 2K per gram and even in 2020 Rs 3K per gram. Today its hovering around Rs 7K per gram. Anyway the relevant section in the Article has all the details with solid reliable sources. However just wanted to let you know this from my side. Regards. SumerianPrince (talk) 19:34, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttps://www.oneindia.com/2011/07/09/padmanabhaswamy-temple-treasure-belongs-to-deity-kerala-aid0101.html

[2] ttps://www.thehindu.com/news/national/supreme-court-orders-inventory-of-sabarimala-deitys-sacred-ornaments/article30760466.ece

[1]

[2]