User talk:Wwweeeeepppping

Welcome!

Hello, Wwweeeeepppping, 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 recent edits to the page Mayamohini did not conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may have been removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations verified in reliable, reputable print or online sources or in other reliable media. Always 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.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to The Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Introduction tutorial
Contributing to Wikipedia
How to edit a page
Introduction to referencing
Help pages
Simplified Manual of Style
Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

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 need personal help ask me on my talk page, or ask a question on your talk page. Again, welcome. Ravensfire (talk) 18:58, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

April 2023

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to K.G.F: Chapter 2, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your 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. The summary you added with this edit [1] clearly is not supported by any source nor by any reasonable reading of the critical review section. Please don't add summaries without a source that is s summary of multiple reviews or is CLEARLY based solely on what's in the article. If there's only a couple of reviews in the article, don't summarize it. Ravensfire (talk) 16:40, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Si3 (film). 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. Same issue here - your change to the summary isn't supported by a source nor by any reasonable reading of the reception section. This needs to stop. Ravensfire (talk) 13:25, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, 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, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Googly (2013 film), you may be blocked from editing. [2] - AGAIN, clearly not an accurate summary nor supported by sources. If you continue, you will end up blocked from editing due to your disruptive edits. STOP. Do you understand this? Ravensfire (talk) 15:26, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This guy is not stopping, again he made disruptive edits in KGF Chapter 1 and KGF Chapter 2. Just came after reverting those edits. He should be blocked. MNWiki845 (talk) 10:00, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Final warning

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Sneha996 (talk) 20:57, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 2023

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content. Verifiability is a core Wikipedia policy. 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 at the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:07, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at K.G.F: Chapter 2. You have continued to make edits not remotely supported by sources after warnings and a block for exactly that reason. STOP. Ravensfire (talk) 23:52, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content. Verifiability is a core Wikipedia policy.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text at the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:43, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]