User talk:Chauhan1192

Welcome!
Hello, Chauhan1192, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! Sitush (talk) 15:28, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Manual of Style

Sisodia etc
You are making several edits such as this one. You say that "a number of scholars" think, but you cite only the very unreliable and old Athelstane Baines. Can you please identify the other scholars, preferably from among seriuous academics who have published in, say, the last 30 or so years rather than some halfwit amateur from the British Raj period. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 15:30, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Sitush (talk) 15:44, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Origins
Stop now, please. You are adding the content to all sorts of articles, it has been discussed and often dismissed time and again, and therefore you are running a risk of falling foul of the general sanctions that apply to this type of article. I am opening a discussion at Talk:Chauhan - let's sort it out there and then move on. It will probably end up at the dispute resolution noticeboard, but at least we will come to some sort of "rule"! that we can use for the foreseeable future. I attach below an explanation of the sanctions. - Sitush (talk) 16:32, 15 May 2012 (UTC)


 * See Copying within Wikipedia. And please note that the content that you copied is by no means uncontested. I've definitely written most of it and I know that there has been a row about it in the last few days, wherever it came from. - Sitush (talk) 17:08, 15 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Found it! You copied from Rajput. Please see Talk:Rajput - Sitush (talk) 17:10, 15 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Copied from User talk:Sitush Ok Sure..I try that the content that copied is by no means uncontested. u've written most of it and I saw that there has been a row about it in the last few days, wherever it came from. ..Thanks for ur advice..hv a nice day.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chauhan1192 (talk • contribs) 17:17, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or  located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 16:58, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

May 2012
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Sisodia. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement. Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Sitush (talk) 17:28, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.


 * Although you have changed the wording (thanks) you are still inserting material that you know from my talk page is considered to be poorly sourced. You should discuss, not edit war. If need be, we can take the reliability of the source (Baines) for a review by third parties, but the first step is to talk at Talk:Sisodia and where ever else you are reinstating the content. Take a look at Talk:Chauhan for an example - I opened a discussion there not too many minutes ago, based on your contributions to that article. - Sitush (talk) 17:32, 15 May 2012 (UTC)


 * You have just entered the contentious information at Chauhan once again, despite being told of the discussion at Talk:Chauhan. I have reverted you. If you reinstate it once more then I will seek to have you blocked from contributing for a while. Surely you do not want that to happen? - Sitush (talk) 16:53, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Chauhan

 * Oh, and when you do discuss it, you should Assume Good Faith and not make accusations against people you disagree with - no accusations of conspiracies, etc. That is another thing that can get you blocked, under the terms of the sanctions that you have been notified of. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:57, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Unattirbuted copy/pastes
Sir,Please...unblock. Is it a sin in introducing reliable references/books/sources/well known facts....why 2 block 4 instating reality? Please unblock..dere is a lot of work n real edits r waiting...Is anybody out dere to reinstate ma edits on Chauhan article..Please.
 * The problems with your edits have been explained at length, but if you either do not understand what you are being told or are not prepared to listen to it, you can not be allowed to edit. Please re-read and understand the messages you have been given, and once you are able to commit to modifying your contentious editing style, please feel free to request an unblock by following the directions in the block notice. Also, you cannot make requests to edit articles while you are blocked - you can only use this page to work towards unblock. (Oh, and one last thing - I think you would get a better reception if you speak in proper English rather than textspeak, and use correct spelling rather than slang - "there" instead of "dere", "my" instead of "ma", etc.) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:18, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article Akshay Kumar, please cite a reliable source for your addition. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. See Citing sources for how to cite sources, and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. ''

I am sorry but you are straight back in there, adding poor content. In this instance, you have inserted a terrible source (DNA India) that contains just a single sentence & used that to massively change the ethnicity of the article subject, which was sourced to an interview with him. You need to read WP:BLP.'' Sitush (talk) 09:06, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Please do not add or change content without verifying it by citing reliable sources, as you did to Bargujar. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Sitush (talk) 10:15, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for continuing the disruptive edits that got you your previous block.. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:35, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
 * This is your third block now, for the same reasons - mostly adding unsourced or improperly sourced material to articles, despite having those additions contested. You have had people try to explain Wikipedia's sourcing policy to you a number of times, but you don't seem to be getting it. Have a proper read of WP:RS while you are blocked, and if there is any disputed material that you wish to add, please discuss it concisely on the appropriate talk page first and seek consensus (and please try to avoid enormous long screeds, as people rarely have the time or the patience to try to extract your key points from them). -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:39, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Sir Plz unblock.
 * Oh, and when this block expires, if you continue editing in the same style, patience will be getting thin and you may end up blocked indefinitely. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:40, 28 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Considering the disruption you've been causing so far, as an uninvolved administrator, I am also hereby imposing a topic ban on you. For the next three months you are prohibited from making any edits regarding Indian social groups across all namespaces (i.e. everywhere on Wikipedia). This restriction applies to you as a person and not only to this account, which means that edits made using an IP will be considered violations thereof. Salvio  Let's talk about it! 12:34, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

June 2014
Hello, Chauhan1192. I see you, or well, this account, has been inactive for two whole years. And yet, less than a day after I was forced to semiprotect Chauhan yesterday because of all the disruption and addition of poorly sourced material from new accounts and IPs, you started editing again, with this autoconfirmed account that was able to edit through semi. And I notice you began with adding back some of the very same content that those socks had been pushing. This makes it quite obvious that some, or likely enough all, of them were your socks. It's hardly even necessary to note that you talk just like the socks, too, but you do ("what the injustice towards Chauhan Gurjar warriors, martyr n love to thier hindustan nation. somebody stop this sitush" and "U ARE NOT RELIABLE. SOMEBODY STOP THIS SITUSH", this on article talk. Quite familiar.) You have been blocked indefinitely for abusing multiple accounts, per WP:DUCK. 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. Bishonen &#124; talk 13:25, 14 June 2014 (UTC).