User talk:William Raw

William Raw, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi William Raw! 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 experienced editors like Jtmorgan (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:03, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

January 2021

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Hardeep Singh Puri, you may be blocked from editing. Unreferenced additions to BLP. Prolix 💬 10:54, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Hazratganj, you may be blocked from editing. Prolix 💬 10:59, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Hyderabad-Karnataka, you may be blocked from editing.
Please keep placenames and spellings as per the article title, and as WP:COMMONNAME - Arjayay (talk) 11:25, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Insurgency in Northeast India, you may be blocked from editing.NomanPK44 (talk) 18:38, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary, as you did at Sikhs. Prolix 💬 19:26, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant – Khorasan Province. Prolix 💬 17:49, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at 2002 Qasim Nagar massacre. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. h 13:58, 11 January 2021 (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 without adequate explanation, as you did at Insurgency in Jammu and Kashmir, you may be blocked from editing. Kautilya3 (talk) 19:32, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Galwan River. 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 lose their editing privileges on that page. 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 result in loss of your editing privileges. Thank you. Kautilya3 (talk) 18:31, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Kautilya3 (talk) 17:45, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did at Manipuri Brahmin, you may be blocked from editing. Do not add content that is not explicitly written in the source. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 06:09, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary, as you did at Manipuri Brahmin. Do not remove sourced content and do not remove request for page number/working link. You have been warned plenty, you'll be reported next time. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 19:29, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Caste and self-identification Comment

Caste in a WP:BLP (for a living person) requires self-identification as per multiple consensuses at WP:INB. That is the person should say something like "I am a Khatri", or "I am a Rapjut", etc, that too in a reliable source. If the source author or somebody else mentions the caste of the article's subject, it is not applicable. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 14:45, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, William Raw. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page Research and Analysis Wing, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:Spam);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Idell (talk) 10:10, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Special Frontier Force, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cabinet Secretariat. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:16, 10 January 2021 (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.

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) 19:32, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Deceptive edit summaries like this won't help you when the time of reckoning comes. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 19:47, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

January 2021

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Research and Analysis Wing, you may be blocked from editing. I dream of horses (Contribs) Please notify me after replying off my talk page. Thank you. 12:39, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please use edit summaries when removing content. – Thjarkur (talk) 17:15, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Would you mind explaining why your edit summary here says "Adding content" when in fact you're removing content, and changing sourced numbers? – Thjarkur (talk) 20:36, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Again

Hello William, are you seeing these messages on your talk page? If so, please reply here below. You again removed content on the article Insurgency in Tripura while claiming it was just "Minor grammatical changes". – Thjarkur (talk) 10:13, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yet again you removed content on Jaish-e-Mohammed without explanation. – Thjarkur (talk) 11:51, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

February 2021

Hello, I'm GreaterPonce665. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Ramdev, 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. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. GreaterPonce665 ^(TALK) 17:56, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Caste and self-identification

If you want to mention caste of a living person (WP:BLP), it would require self-identification in a reliable source as per consensus at WP:INB. Meaning, an interview or declaration where the subject says something like "I am a Brahmin" or "Being a Brahmin", etc. The source you added here doesn't hellp in that case. CAn you provide a link in which she says that she is a Brahmin, explicitly? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 08:15, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced content and general disruption

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}.

OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:57, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Same disruption, longer block

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}.

OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:34, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

March 2021

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for disruptive editing.

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 ~~~~}}. —SpacemanSpiff 09:35, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]