User talk:420insan

May 2012
This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Dera Sacha Sauda, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:42, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

July 2012
Your addition to Dera Sacha Sauda has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text, or images borrowed from other websites, or printed material without a verifiable license; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content, such as sentences or images&mdash;you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:44, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
 * The warning above is not just a suggestion. Copying material from other places on to Wikipedia is absolutely forbidden by our policies. Instead, you need to summarize the information, provide a full valid reference (see WP:CITE), and place it into the proper part of the article. Do it again and I will block you. Qwyrxian (talk) 22:10, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

August 2012
You have been blocked temporarily from editing for continued copyright vioaltions after warning. In addition, your last edit included a change from "spiritual" to "castration", which is either vandalism or extreme POV-pushing, both of which are unacceptable, as you did at Dera Sacha Sauda. 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, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Qwyrxian (talk) 21:53, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Qwyrxian, you do not have to behave like a paid tout of the crooks like Dera Sacha Sauda leader. I am reporting the current hot news about castration of 400 people at Dera. You are acting like a paid pimp trying to remove true but bad news about Dera Sacha Sauda. Wikipedia is about facts, not self styled policing by dums like you. Here are the news I am refering to. tell me where is vandalism.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/hc-issues-notices-to-dera-chief-for-castration-of-sadhus/980607/ http://www.istream.com/news/watch/138657/400-people-castrated-at-Dera-Sacha-Sauda


 * I strongly recommend against making personal attacks. While your attacks don't particularly bother me, they are forbidden by policy (see WP:NPA), and will likely result in your account being blocked longer.
 * Regarding the specific issue: I see that, in fact, it wasn't vandalism, but it was very much a biased presentation. Just because someone has accused them of castrating some of their members does not make them a "castration organization". Now, it may be appropriate to include that information in the article, but we have to do three key things.
 * Under absolutely no circumstance may you ever, ever just copy and paste information from another source. That is not only a violation of Wikipedia policy, it may be a violation of law. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. To include the information, it would need to be rewritten in new words.
 * The included information must be given due weight--that is, we can't make this seem like the most important thing to the organisation. It's just one part of their bigger story.
 * We must, as you yourself point, out, explain only the facts. Right now, there is no proof of the castrations--only allegations. And including allegations in a WP article is highly questionable. It's probably okay here if we include a single sentence, somewhere in the middle of the text, using the IndiaExpress as a source (the other source is not a reliable source by our guidelines), and if we indicate only an allegation against the organization, not against any specific living people.
 * So, are you willing to work according to Wikipedia's rules--being neutral, not violating copyright, and not trying to use WP to promote your own opinion? I will help you write a sentence that includes that information, but only if you will agree to follow the rules. Qwyrxian (talk) 03:15, 4 August 2012 (UTC)