User talk:Suryasingh31

Suryasingh31, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi Suryasingh31! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Technical 13 (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 01:15, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

April 2014

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Jai Prakash Menon, 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. Caution for unexplained removal of properly sourced controversial content. Thomas.W ^talk 11:51, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits on Jai Prakash Menon

Please stop your repeated attempts to remove sourced content and references from the article. The text in the article is supported by multiple third-party references (please see Wikipedia's rules about reliable sources). If you have objections to the content please take it to the talk page of the article. Thomas.W ^talk 13:44, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did at Jai Prakash Menon, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. Thomas.W ^talk 13:48, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Jai Prakash Menon shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Thomas.W ^talk 13:48, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Thomas, the language edited by you at Jai Prakash Menon doesn't seems to be driven by the logical research. Your continuous edits to enforce your point seems an impression that you are finding a way to prove your point without giving any logical explanation to the same.

By driving an edit war, your intentions and credibility behind the edits are doubtful and will be taken in appropriate forum. Suggestion would be to do a thorough research on the topic and then try to impose your opinion.

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:Suryasingh31 reported by User:Thomas.W (Result: ). Thank you. Thomas.W ^talk 14:14, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]