User talk:BodduLokesh

May 2015
Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to India, but we cannot accept original research. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, and ideas—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Specifically, you were replacing scientific terms appearing in the sources by modified versions. Thank you. Kautilya3 (talk) 18:08, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Please do not add or change content, as you did at India, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Rahul Text me 20:11, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at India shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

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. Abecedare (talk) 20:31, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
Dear Eshwar.om, I tried to do what I felt most appropriate, at the best of my knowledge. You can have a better understanding of my points if you look at my much detailed explanatory discussion on the Sarasvati river with some of the experienced editors @User talk:Kautilya3 under the section titled "Saraswati and myth-making".

Best regards. --BodduLokesh (talk) 13:39, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!
Dear I tried to do the most appropriate, at the best of my knowledge.

Anyway, thanks for the cup of tea for me. But I would rather prefer a cup of hot soup instead....(just joking)

Best regards, take care, --BodduLokesh (talk) 13:50, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

hi
hi BodduLokesh ,how are you?!i hope your fine.Regarding saraswati river the following links  may help you.

thank you. Eshwar .om Talk tome 07:23, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
 * |Saraswati river sprouts to life after 4,000 years in Haryana
 * River Saraswati is for real, found in Haryana

February 2016
Greetings. At least one of your recent edits, such as the edit you made to Indus Valley Civilisation, did not appear to be constructive and has been or will be reverted or removed. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, 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 some test edits, please use the 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. Thank you. Joshua Jonathan  -  Let's talk!   07:21, 21 February 2016 (UTC)