User talk:GOVINDKRISHNA GKM

April 2014
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Barwani 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: Barwani was changed by GOVINDKRISHNA GKM (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.95975 on 2014-04-03T10:29:51+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 10:29, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Signing edits
Please do not add "edited by GOVINDKRISHNA GKM" each time you edit an article. ''' Flat Out   let's discuss it   11:19, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

GOVINDKRISHNA GKM, you are invited on a Wikipedia Adventure!
 The Adventure

Your recent editing history at Barwani 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. ''' Flat Out   let's discuss it   00:12, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Thank you. ''' Flat Out   let's discuss it   11:34, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at Barwani. 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 the following text below this notice:. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. 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. Bbb23 (talk) 11:43, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Pakdam Pakdai
Hello GOVINDKRISHNA GKM,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Pakdam Pakdai for deletion, because it's too short to identify the subject of the article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.  Occult Zone  ( Talk ) 13:38, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Pakdam Pakdai


The article Pakdam Pakdai has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * No indication of notability.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Pam D  07:49, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Pakdam Pakdai
Hello GOVINDKRISHNA GKM,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Pakdam Pakdai for deletion, because it doesn't seem to have any encyclopedic content.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.  Occult Zone  ( Talk ) 07:19, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Pakdam Pakdai


The article Pakdam Pakdai has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * No evidence of notability.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Pam D  07:58, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Pakdam Pakdai for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Pakdam Pakdai is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Pakdam Pakdai until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Laun chba  ller  09:44, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

January 2015
Please do not add or change content, as you did to Jatav, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Neil N  talk to me 08:25, 4 January 2015 (UTC)