User talk:Ali aff

Copyright problems with Sohail wajahat
Hello. Concerning your contribution, Sohail wajahat, please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). As a copyright violation, Sohail wajahat appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Sohail wajahat has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License (CC-BY-SA) then you should do one of the following:


 * If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at and send an email with the message to . See Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
 * If a note on the original website states that it is licensed under the CC-BY-SA license, leave a note at with a link to where we can find that note.
 * If you hold the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the CC-BY-SA and GFDL, and note that you have done so on.

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright concerns very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Thank you. Hekerui (talk) 13:01, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

I don't see a block on your account, but I do see something a little odd; is there any connection between this account and User:PaulMacnamara? -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 13:04, 6 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I would greatly appreciate seeing a list of all accounts you have registered on Wikipedia. Hers fold  (t/a/c) 14:53, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

July 2011
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Ajmal Kasab. When removing content, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the content has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Sodabottle (talk) 12:41, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

July 2013
Hello, I'm Vigyani. I noticed that you made a change to an article, 2008 Mumbai attacks, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Vigyani talkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 05:48, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi you deleted my contribution for which the source was provided from the newspaper "Times of India". I want this new development to be added in this article. Please advice what is incorrect in that so that i amend and re-contribute.


 * Read comment at my talk page and open a discuss at article talk page. -- Vigyani talkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 07:59, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Vigyani talkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 07:57, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at 2008 Mumbai attacks shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;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&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;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. Vigyani talkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 08:01, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Vigyani --- i am just trying to be right in my contribution, no way engaging in edit war. i have added the sources and reworded the contribution, but nothing works, kindlu advice how this allegation matter can be included in the article.
 * Hi Ali Aff, I am happy about you. For you I have opened a thread, whose link I have provided at the bottom. When there is a dispute about the content, we discuss the content on article talk page. You can comment there and other editor will also be commenting and then we wait for few days and form a consensus. -- Vigyani talkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 11:50, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

You can comment here
Hi, I have opened thread for you. You can comment on Talk:2008_Mumbai_attacks -- Vigyani talkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 08:28, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Promoting fringe theories at Mumbai Attacks
Hello there. I have noticed that you are promoting a WP:FRINGE theory that the Mumbai Attacks were an inside job. That's disruptive. Please stop.William Jockusch (talk) 16:20, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Get consensus before deleting factual content
It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Har Gobind Khorana. Before removing content, please discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page.

It is important to get consensus from editors working on the article before making deletions. i.e. ''I plan to delete the following ... do you support this?''

If this was a mistake, don't worry; the content has been restored.

Peter K Burian (talk) 14:43, 12 January 2018 (UTC)