User talk:Dm51c

January 2015
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Radha has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.


 * ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, [ report it here], remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
 * For help, take a look at the introduction.
 * The following is the log entry regarding this message: Radha was changed by Dm51c (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.856478 on 2015-01-25T15:46:26+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 15:46, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Excesses. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Radha without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; I restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! ~ Excesses ~ (talk) 19:49, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

August 2016
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Krishna, did not appear constructive and have been undone. 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 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. Mayur (talk•Email) 06:20, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Caution: WP:3RR
@Dm51c: please review the 3RR guideline. Requesting your patience, Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 01:19, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Welcome!
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Simplified Manual of Style


 * Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:
 * Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
 * Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
 * Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
 * No edit warring or abuse of multiple accounts.
 * If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to [ do so].
 * Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject. Deliberately adding such content or otherwise editing articles maliciously is considered vandalism; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
 * Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Kautilya3 (talk) 11:54, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

ARBIPA sanctions alert
Kautilya3 (talk) 11:55, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

January 2021
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Krishna. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted. 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. Thank you. JRDkg (talk) 20:36, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
 * 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 stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Krishna, you may be blocked from editing. JRDkg (talk) 11:49, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
 * 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.

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia. JRDkg (talk) 12:10, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Krishna. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose their editing privileges on that page. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to result in loss of your editing privileges. Thank you. User3749 (talk) 13:06, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

 You have been blocked from editing from certain pages (Krishna) for a period of 72 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   14:47, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

 You have been blocked indefinitely from editing certain pages (Krishna) for edit warring. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. —  Newslinger  talk   08:16, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

unblock request
the other user is continuously reverting my edits backed by sources. They are backed my near-unanimous opinion related to the wider traditions and ha have added numerous sources. this blocking is not fair. its JRDkg who is getting personal and is the only one who is squarely reverting my edits and wants to have his own factually incorrect content. Its he who is doing vandalism. i am disappointed by this block. It was also discussed in talk page, i have mentioned several reasons for change, i know that getting consensus from lot of other users take time,some have implicitly agreed to my changes if backed my sources, i have provided many sources and given elaborate reason n talk page. id dont want to get personal but that user has a problem in accusing anyone of vandalization if it's according to what he want. hope i will be unblocked.Dm51c (talk) 09:00, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
 * . Your unblock request at had already been declined by, and I agree with their decision. In Special:Diff/1003825318, and Special:Diff/1003908338, you continued to edit war on the Krishna article immediately after your previous block for edit warring expired. Unblock requests must focus on your own actions, not the actions of other editors. Please see the guide to appealing a block for advice. I recommend editing in less controversial topic areas before requesting another unblock. The guide on dispute resolution and the policy against edit warring outlines some of the expectations for editing on Wikipedia. —  Newslinger   talk   09:11, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Then why the other user is not blocked as its he who started the edit war by squarelry reverting edits. No other user has explicit problem with my changes. Infact one has said it has no problem with the changed terms. Wikedpedia has policy of not unnecesary reverting edits if it doesnt add up to his opinion. I am not at all vandalizing. Infact its i who suggested to the modify other content who are sourced from news article which he removed later. He reverted at least my 6 edits my using the farce of the 'word vandalism' as he have an alternate opionion which is technically wrong as you can see in the discussuon in talk page Correcting article to be more neutral is not vandalism. Its he who should be blocked by you administrator as he started the edit warring. Dm51c (talk) 10:00, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Your series of edits at Special:Diff/1001765549/1002866401 was the action that triggered the edit war. When those edits were reverted, the correct action would have been to discuss the edits on the talk page, instead of immediately reinstating them without consensus. Your current block is based on Special:Diff/1003825318 and Special:Diff/1003908338, in which you resumed the edit war immediately after your previous block for edit warring expired. In the edit summary of Special:Diff/1003908338, you also improperly referred to 's edit as "vandalism". Please refer to the bold, revert, discuss process for the recommended way to resolve content disputes in articles. You are still free to participate in the talk page discussion at Talk:Krishna, as long as you adhere to the policies and guidelines. —  Newslinger  talk   02:27, 1 February 2021 (UTC)