User talk:Jangidbrahmin

Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Jangid Brahmin, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. Melcous (talk) 03:49, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Khati, you may be blocked from editing. Your edits have been automatically marked as vandalism and have been automatically reverted. The following is the log entry regarding this vandalism: Khati was changed by Jangidbrahmin (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.952404 on 2016-10-27T04:10:11+00:00. Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 04:10, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Jangid Brahmin


The article Jangid Brahmin has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern:
 * Topic appears to exist, but format, content, etc of this version are impossible, requiring total re-write with proper sourcing.

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. MatthewVanitas (talk) 04:33, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Rewrite of Jangid
I'm very glad you brought this topic to our attention since it needed coverage, but your work simply was not usable since you did not provide sourcing (blogs and fan-sites are not allowed). I've done a total re-write using solely sourcing to serious academic works.

Note also you cannot list people as Jangids on the page unless both we have an existing Wikipedia article for them, and their article states (and is clearly cited) that they are categorized as Jangid. You cannot simply claim it, it must already be a proven fact in their cited article.

Please communicate with me on my Talk page if you have any questions; if you simply change others' work with no explanation, they will block your account, so it is very important that you explain you edits and communicate with other editors. MatthewVanitas (talk) 04:46, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

October 2016
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you blank out or remove content from Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Jangid. Jim1138 (talk) 03:38, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Jangid Brahmin


A tag has been placed on Jangid Brahmin requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

No claim to significance, bad formatting, etc.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. RileyBugzYell at me &#124; Edits 03:03, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

December 2016
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Jangid. 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 editing privileges. 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 lead to a loss of editing privileges. Thank you. noq (talk) 10:52, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

June 2017
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page:.  Acroterion   (talk)   02:36, 3 June 2017 (UTC)