User talk:Manish2542

Welcome!
Hello, Manish2542, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your edits to the page Indo-Mauritian have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may be removed if they have not yet been. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles. As well, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name 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! AdventurousSquirrel (talk) 04:18, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

January 2014
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one of your recent edits to Curry 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: Curry was changed by Manish2542 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.885099 on 2014-01-07T03:19:58+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 03:20, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Indic Scripts
Hello. I believe there are several reasons for this policy; the easiest way to find them is to go to the WP:INDICSCRIPT page, and read the linked RfC, which it was derived from. I do not personally have a position on this; I was merely enforcing the policy. Regards, Vanamonde93 (talk) 16:31, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Hullo, I read the different arguments for and against Indic Scripts and I can't see on what basis they reached a consensus, actually the discussion was closed without any true solution to the impeding problem

I'm new to Wikipedia as an editor, so isn't there a way to re-open this issue and settle it? I've been on the wikipedia page of Ada Yonath, Nobel Laureate in Chemistry and guess what? The name is also in Hebrew, normal as she is Israeli but her ancestors came from Poland, so her native language was more probably Polish or even Yiddish than Hebrew

Still, the reason why Hebrew was chosen is simple, she was in a country where Hebrew is the official language but Arabic is an official language of Israel too, still, they picked Hebrew because she is Jewish and not from a Muslim Background

So for all Indian born individuals, the name should be in Hindi and Devanagari script as the Indian Constitution recognises it and English as the two official languages, and in addition say for someone like Modi, as he is culturally Gujarati, it is befitting to have his name in that language too- Manish2542

What do you say about that?

I can't understand this plain discrimination against Indic script when the same isn't done for others, King Abdullah II of Jordan has his name in arabic too, so why these double standards?

Welcome!!
Ha, thanks for the cookie Manish2542. Yes, I usually appreciate good edits. Welcome to Wikipedia. If there is anything you are unsure about, you are more than welcome to drop a message on my talk page. Happy editing! Savvyjack23 (talk) 04:16, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

December 2014
Hello, I'm NFD9001. I wanted to let you know that I undid one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Mauritian Solidarity Front— because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. nfd9001 (talk) 21:54, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

And may I know why you undid the edit?

The one who wrote the article is clearly biased, at one point he even calls the person "brother" Cehl, either you delete the entire article or you re write it according to wikipedia standards

such type of nonsense is not acceptable here

Warning
This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. --YOMAL SIDOROFF-BIARMSKII (talk) 23:28, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Is that a joke? And who are you in any case to threaten others?

I didn't vandalise wikipedia, I updated the GDP per capita figure of the country, don't you even know how to read???


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita&diff=next&oldid=653760814 --YOMAL SIDOROFF-BIARMSKII (talk) 07:01, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Well truth finally triumphs, some one else did the exact edit I made weeks ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita

Disambiguation link notification for July 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mauritius, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bihari. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Contests
User:Dr. Blofeld has created WikiProject Africa/Contests. The idea is to run a series of contests/editathons focusing on each region of Africa. He has spoken to Wikimedia about it and $1000-1500 is possible for prize money. As someone who has previously expressed interest in African topics, would you be interested in contributing to one or assisting draw up core article/missing article lists? He says he's thinking of North Africa for an inaugural one in October. If interested please sign up in the participants section of the Contest page, thanks.♦ -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 01:31, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Enoch Powell
Enoch Powell is most notable for his 'rivers of blood' speech, which was widely condemned as racist and for which he was fired from government. Sqrl mnky (talk) 09:12, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

I agree context is important, the context of my edit is on a 100 greatest Britons entry, where Enoch Powell is listed simply as 'politician'. His most notable action as a politician was his 'rivers of blood' speech, which was considered unacceptable by the government of the day; 'Enoch Powell' is British cultural shorthand for 'racist' so it's disingenuous to list him as a politician when his inclusion on the list has far more to do with his status as a poster-boy for the right then his achievements in government.

I agree that there's more to him than that, but in context of the entry, simply listing him as 'politician' is misleading by omission. Sqrl mnky (talk) 07:15, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

January 2018
Hello, I'm Ravensfire. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Muhammad Iqbal, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. ''Other wikipedia pages, whether it's the English or the French or any other language, are NOT reliable sources and should not be used as sources. ''  Ravensfire  (talk) 00:34, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Sridevi
No, it's completely standard. If you look at Billy Graham, that was originally proposed as an RD and was only changed to a blurb when there was significant support for one. The same will happen to this one if there is similar significant support. Black Kite (talk) 10:58, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Also, I don't oppose her being there for RD when her article is sufficiently sourced - I'll certainly support then. You'd probably be better off fixing that problem because it isn't going to be posted to RD or ITN with unsourced sections in it. Black Kite (talk) 11:08, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
 * And if you remove other people's comments like this again, you'll be blocked. Stop it. Black Kite (talk) 11:10, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

ITN
Please stop your disruption. If you want to argue for a full listing then do so at the existing nomination. Do not create another one. Stephen 11:06, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

February 2018
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. 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:. Stephen 11:19, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Further disruption and personal attacks
If I were you, I'd stop doing that right now, or else I suppose you shouldn't be surprised to find yourself indefinitely blocked from Wikipedia. Also, please remember to sign your posts, even those which contain personal attacks or blatant falsehoods, you can do that by typing four tildes. Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:40, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

I always sign my posts, unless I've forgotten to do so. I've got nothing to hide. Don't worry, I made my point clear and stand by it. You don't have to bully me into keeping shut. I won't be reacting on that issue anymore, it's futile, I've understood wikipedian double standards the hard way. You can't blame me for being disgusted. Farewell.Manish2542 (talk) 20:57, 26 February 2018 (UTC)


 * You didn't sign many of your posts at ITNC. I'm not worried about what point you were trying to make, I was worried about the personal attacks, accusations of racism etc, that you unfairly levelled at various editors.  I imagine it won't be long before you're blocked again, but please try not to deliberately personally attack people, see WP:NPA for more information.  The Rambling Man (talk) 21:03, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

To make things clear
The next time you come up with another accusation of bias or veiled racism like this I will block you. Apart from the fact you're wrong, you don't even have any reason to complain here - the article has been waiting to be posted to RD for nearly three days for the sake of references - and yes, we did need them, that's very straightforward. It's not bias in any shape or form. Now drop the matter, please. Black Kite (talk) 11:12, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

She was given full state funeral by the insignificant Republic of India. This is solely for informing, no accusation, sire. Shanti.
 * That's a great point - it's the sort of thing you should have doing in the first place, instead of accusing other people ... Black Kite (talk) 22:00, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Muhammad Iqbal
Two warnings without a template. First, stop the nationalist attacks. Not accurate for one and not helpful. If you continue, I will bring it up on ANI. Probably could go to AE, but that's a really big hammer. Second, stop edit-warring on this article. Your changes are questioned and reverted by multiple editors. Discuss on the article talk page. Edit-warring isn't just the WP:3RR line as you well know. Just stop.  Ravensfire  (talk) 19:15, 25 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Okay, have it your way. I'll officially notify you about the ANI post once it's up.   Ravensfire  (talk) 19:17, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.

Discretionary Sanctions Notification - India/Pakistan
power~enwiki ( π, ν ) 19:21, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

March 2018
You have been blocked from editing 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:. Neil N  talk to me 00:02, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Note that you are editing in an area covered by discretionary sanctions. Any more disruptive editing, attacks, or aspersions may result in lengthy topic bans or blocks. --Neil N  talk to me 00:05, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Shilpa Shetty, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bunt ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Shilpa_Shetty check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Shilpa_Shetty?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Removal of Content from article
Hi Manish

I refer to your repetitive removal of well referenced content on the article Mauritius. Please note that it is the policy of Wikipedia that its articles should be based on reliable sources. Wikipedia does not publish original research. Its content is determined by previously published information rather than the beliefs or experiences of its editors. Even if you're sure something is true, it must be verifiable before you can add it. While its seem that you have some disagreement, i noticed that you are repetitively removing all other well referenced contents without any explanation. Please note that all Wikipedia content—articles, categories, templates, and other types of pages—is edited collaboratively. No one, no matter how skilled, or how high-standing in the community, has the right to act as though they are the owner of a particular page (see WP:OWNERSHIP).

To come to the disaccords that you have expressed in your comments, i decided to give you some clarifications why they were reverted;

1. ''Reverted to the former introduction. The current one was too bloated. Wonder why the noted fact about Mauritius being the only HIndu majority country of Africa gets removed constantly. Hinduphobia I guess.''

2. ''This is an introduction on Mauritius not on the Chagos dispute. Even countries with a richer History have a more modest introduction. The fact that it is the ONLY Hindu majority country in Africa is a NOTED fact. It is UNCOMMON explaining its mention here.''

Please be more specific why you think the introduction should be completely removed, the actual one is based on references from the Permanent Court of Arbitration and the International Court of Justice. With regard to Hindu majority country of Africa, this is already mentioned in the demographics section and this is not a valid reason to remove the whole introduction. You could have easily just add the sentence to the intro instead of removing the whole introduction. With regard to Chagos, please note that Mauritius considered it as part of its territory, the Chagos is mentioned in the Constitution of Mauritius and the United Nations General Assembly just brought the UK to the ICJ to have an advisory opinion on this issue. It is therefore worthwhile to mention the Chagos in the intro.

3. ''These constant edits are removing important information and adding futile "hearsay". There's a "religion" subsection in all "demographics" section on Wikipedia for ALL countries. Stick to the format.''

4. ''ALL countries have a subsection on religion in their demographics section. That's a general format. It used to have more than two sentences before edits were made. This article is getting dumbed down. Eg in the language section all the references to the Acts of Parliament on the Asian Languages have been removed. This is vandalism. 

Please note that while there are religion sections in several articles, this is not the case for ALL articles as you mentioned. Even if all articles have this subsection, it does not necessarily mean that it should be the case here. It makes no sense to have a subsection for just two sentence while it is completely relevant to the demographics section which is already very short. Of course if this particular topic is developed later on, the demographics section can be divided into subsections. Moreover, i removed the table as it is outdated and completely distort the article. With regards to Asian languages, it was me who contributed this whole section together with the references, i don't see why i would remove it.

5. ''Language (Bhojpuri), Religion (Maha Shivaratree) even Politics (All Prime Ministers have been "biharis"). It's a commin feature with Fidji, Trinidad and Tobago, Suriname and Guyana)''

6. ''Can you provide a reliable source for the claimed french origins of White Mauritians? It is claimed in the article that Bhojpuri used to be widely spoken but somehow it is not plain logic that most Indo-mauritians are of Bihari origins? Fine, you've got a reference now.''

Please refer to what i have mentioned above, Wikipedia does not publish original research. While there is no need for reference for well known FACTS, saying that most Mauritian of Indian origin are Biharis and a minority of Tamils is very specific information, India is really vast, and Mauritians comes from different part of it. If you can get a reference from published research work or statistics from the Mahatma Gandhi Institute of Mauritius, then fine, it will not be considered as hearsay and remove by anyone. With regards to French origins of White Mauritians, since there are no reliable reference to sustain this claim and you are of the opinion that this is not the truth, of course you can remove it.

Please rest assure that the aim of this comment is not to be against your contributions to Wikipedia, indeed i am very happy that you are contributing to Mauritius related articles and encourage you to do so. Please do not hesitate to leave me a message to discuss any issues amicably, we are brothers after all :). Cheers Kingroyos (talk) 18:00, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

''I refer to your repetitive removal of well referenced content on the article Mauritius. Please note that it is the policy of Wikipedia that its articles should be based on reliable sources. Wikipedia does not publish original research. Its content is determined by previously published information rather than the beliefs or experiences of its editors. Even if you're sure something is true, it must be verifiable before you can add it. While its seem that you have some disagreement, i noticed that you are repetitively removing all other well referenced contents without any explanation. Please note that all Wikipedia content—articles, categories, templates, and other types of pages—is edited collaboratively. No one, no matter how skilled, or how high-standing in the community, has the right to act as though they are the owner of a particular page (see WP:OWNERSHIP).'' Kingroyos

I agree that articles should be based on reliable sources, never wrote the contrary. May I know what well referenced contents have I removed without explanation? Whenever I edited, I gave explanations that might not have suited you. That's a whole different issue. I never behaved as if I owned the page, do you? You see my edits as repetitive removal of contents. I see yours as repetitive additions of futile contents or contents that shouldn't be where they are. Manish2542

The links to the repetitive removal of well sourced contents and reliable references are listed below. Kingroyos

1. ''Please be more specific why you think the introduction should be completely removed, the actual one is based on references from the Permanent Court of Arbitration and the International Court of Justice. With regard to Hindu majority country of Africa, this is already mentioned in the demographics section and this is not a valid reason to remove the whole introduction. You could have easily just add the sentence to the intro instead of removing the whole introduction. With regard to Chagos, please note that Mauritius considered it as part of its territory, the Chagos is mentioned in the Constitution of Mauritius and the United Nations General Assembly just brought the UK to the ICJ to have an advisory opinion on this issue. It is therefore worthwhile to mention the Chagos in the intro.'' Kingroyos

I didn't remove the introduction. I reverted it back to its original state. One that was considered valid for years. I trimmed it down because, as I already wrote, this is an article on the Republic of Mauritius not on the Chagos dispute. Let's take two examples. The introduction of the United Kingdom makes no mention of the Northern Ireland dispute despite the deaths and decades of war. The introductions of India and Pakistan make no mention of Kashmir despite the deaths, decades of war and the fact that it is an ongoing issue. I'm not advocating for the complete removal of the Chagos dispute but for not allocating undue space to it. The former introduction did that, the new one is bloated and poorly written. I don't favour original research work, but I don't favour political advocacy either in which you are indulging by transforming this, relatively minor international and let's be honest - minor national issue, into a major issue in the introduction of Mauritius. The fact that Mauritius is the ONLY Hindu majority country in Africa is a notable fact that the vast majority of readers don't know about. Isn't this what Wikipedia is all about? Giving important information to its users? Yes, it's mentioned in the Demographics section, so are the economic data in the Economy section and the Chagos issue in the History and Geography sections. If your logic is to be followed then all these should be removed from the introduction too. An introduction gives a brief and general description of a country. Redundancies are not only to be expected, they are absolutely normal. Manish2542

The contents on Wikipedia are never static, the content should always be improved and kept up to date, this is not a valid reason. While trying to trimmed the introduction, you are removing fundamental details about the territory and history of Mauritius. For instance, you have removed the fact about the Treaty of Paris, signed on 30 May 1814 and in which Réunion was returned to France. You also removed the fact that the British colony of Mauritius consisted of the main island of Mauritius along with Rodrigues, Agalega, St Brandon, Tromelin and the Chagos Archipelago, while the Seychelles became a separate colony in 1906. You also removed the fact that the UK did not only split the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritian territory but also the islands of Aldabra, Farquhar and Desroches from the Seychelles, to form the British Indian Ocean Territory. While I have already provided a reliable reference about the sovereignty dispute with Tromelin, you have added wikisource.org as reference (see ). While trying to trimmed down the intro, you have distort the flow of the information and removed other information without giving valid reasons. Your repetitive removal of contents and reliable references in the intro has become unbearable along with personal attacks which you have said to me and other editors in your edit summaries. (see your edits ) Whether you like it or not, please note that the United Nation and its agencies along with all other international organisations recognised the Chagos artipelago as part of Mauritius. The opinion of both the International Court of Justice and the UN General Assembly is very clear on this. (See and ). Kingroyos 2. ''Please note that while there are religion sections in several articles, this is not the case for ALL articles as you mentioned. Even if all articles have this subsection, it does not necessarily mean that it should be the case here. It makes no sense to have a subsection for just two sentence while it is completely relevant to the demographics section which is already very short. Of course if this particular topic is developed later on, the demographics section can be divided into subsections. Moreover, i removed the table as it is outdated and completely distort the article. With regards to Asian languages, it was me who contributed this whole section together with the references, i don't see why i would remove it.'' Kingroyos

I never said you removed it. Someone did and that was a great loss as those Acts of Parliament actually validated the languages that are actually taught in Mauritius. Someone added Odissi or even Swahili, languages never taught or spoken in Mauritius. By keeping those references for Hindi, Urdu, Tamil, Bhojpuri, Telegu, Marathi, Sanskrit and Chinese, at least we had the best sources one could hope for the definitive list of languages. Now nobody knows where the list comes from. Feel free to re-insert those references. The demographics section again, used to be longer. The table is not outdated. It is a historical one showing the demographical evolution. I still insist, and will continue to include the religion sub section as it is a common format for all articles on any countries on Wikipedia. Mauritius should be no different.Manish2542

The acts of parliament which was provided as references was inserted by me to avoid these types of confusions. If you still want to have a subsection for just two lines - I don't know what should I tell you anymore. Kingroyos

3. ''Please refer to what i have mentioned above, Wikipedia does not publish original research. While there is no need for reference for well known FACTS, saying that most Mauritian of Indian origin are Biharis and a minority of Tamils is very specific information, India is really vast, and Mauritians comes from different part of it. If you can get a reference from published research work or statistics from the Mahatma Gandhi Institute of Mauritius, then fine, it will not be considered as hearsay and remove by anyone. With regards to French origins of White Mauritians, since there are no reliable reference to sustain this claim and you are of the opinion that this is not the truth, of course you can remove it.'' Kingroyos

You should have read my comment till the end. "Fine, you've got a reference now." I furnished one. As far as white Mauritians are concerned, that was sarcasm. We both know that they are mostly of French origins. Manish2542

I note that you have been advocating that Mauritius is the only country in Africa to have a Hindu plurality and that most Mauritian Hindus are of Bihari origin. I understand this is one of the main reason you have been reverting the whole intro as the other one did not mention about Mauritius being the only Hindu majority country in Africa. (see your edits ) While there is a high probability that Mauritius may be the only country in Africa with Hindu majority, this claim can easily be disputed as there are no figures from a recognized organisation which says so, moreover even the Mauritian government does not know if Mauritius is still a Hindu majority country as the last census was conducted in 2011. Moreover, the term Hindu in the last census included other religions such as Tamil and Telegu which are in fact different from Hindu. While it has been said that Mauritian Hindus are of Bihari origin, there are also no official source which says that most Mauritian Hindus are of Bihari origin, so it is only hearsay. Moreover none of the references which you have provided are from primary sources, some of them are from unreliable sources and none of them mention the Mauritius is the only Hindu Majority country in Africa or that most Mauritian Hindus are of Bihari origin. (see your references ). Kingroyos

4. ''Please rest assure that the aim of this comment is not to be against your contributions to Wikipedia, indeed i am very happy that you are contributing to Mauritius related articles and encourage you to do so. Please do not hesitate to leave me a message to discuss any issues amicably, we are brothers after all :).'' Kingroyos

Kind of you. I actually translated the whole English introduction into the French article so that the latter could be on par with the former. So yes, I do take this seriously. To sum it up. I'm not criticising the validity of the references related to Chagos but their place in the introduction when they should be down in the History and Geography sections. It can of course have a small mention like it did in the former introduction. The information on Mauritius being the only Hindu majority country of Africa is relevant for the reasons I presented. Manish2542

No comments. Kingroyos

5. On the Bihari issue, I furnished the references. Manish2542

While it has been said that Mauritian Hindus are of Bihari origin, there are also no official source which says that most Mauritian Hindus are of Bihari origin, so it is only hearsay. Moreover none of the references which you have provided are from primary sources, some of them are from unreliable sources and none of them mention the Mauritius is the only Hindu Majority country in Africa or that most Mauritian Hindus are of Bihari origin. (see your references about Hindu majority and Bihari ). Kingroyos

6. I also note that you have replace the sentence about medium of instructions in schools with poor and ambiguous english (See ). Please do not change the last version, it has the same meaning, has simple English and is clearer. Kingroyos

Needless to say that I will be soon reverting the edits that you may have undone. Nothing personal, but like you, I take this seriously. Manish2542 (talk) 19:35, 19 January 2019 (UTC)


 * This type of attitute is not allowed on Wikipedia. Kingroyos

Dear Friend Please do not remove the contents again. My aim is to make the article a better representation of Mauritius and to reach to the status of good article. Most of the contents have been contributed by me and there is still a lot to do. As you may know, its really time consuming to make these contributions, unfortunately i don't have enough time to contribute like before. I am therefore humbly requesting you to works together to make it one of the best. Cheers Kingroyos (talk) 04:16, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Dear friend, If you wish to have a quality article, don't you think you should spend more time removing incorrect information? Like removing "Ratha-Yatra" as a public Holiday? I've done the necessary. Mention not. You seem more interested in adding futile information rather than fact-checking the article. Some value quantity, other quality. To each his own. Manish2542 (talk) 16:10, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Edit war at Mauritius
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the 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 you 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.

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. Thank you. Kingroyos (talk) 19:30, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 6
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bilal Hassani, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dieudonné ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Bilal_Hassani check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Bilal_Hassani?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:11, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

Mauritius
Hello,

"Tamil is the native language of barely 0.06% of all Mauritians". As per 2011 census, Tamil Hindus and Christians constitute about 72,059. Tamils are the earliest settlers in Mauritius. That's why it is present on the Mauritian currency, above the Devanagari script. M.K.Dan (talk) 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Your point is Tamil is not a native language of Mauritius and people learn it as the third language. But it is the native Tamil who learns it as a third language. Tamils are the first Indian settlers in Mauritius and that's why it's used in the currency. M.K.Dan (talk) 00:11, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Hello,

Don't remove cited information. If there is no section for biharis, the telegus and marathis, the franco-mauritians, the chinese and the creoles, then you can create it. You can't remove the section meant for Tamils. Also, as per 2011 census, there is no religion in the name of Biharis, Marathis. The 'Tamil and Tamil Hindu' is the fourth-largest religious group.--M.K.Dan (talk) 18:26, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

New message from DBigXray
 D Big X ray ᗙ  15:50, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Stop your personal Attacks
You are making personal attacks WP:NPA against me in my talk page I clearly explained why i reverted your previous edit in the edit summary

You replaced well-referenced content with your own unsourced POV content WP:POV, Youtube is not a reliable source WP:NOYT, One of your reference is dead and the other one does not mention anything about your addition WP:FICTREF. Plus your references were disruptively added.

Sun eye 1 (talk) 09:34, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

December 2019
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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.

Points to note: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and 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. Kautilya3 (talk) 16:17, 18 December 2019 (UTC) -- D Big X ray ᗙ Happy Holidays!  16:20, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

Personal Attacks in Edit Summaries
Dear Sir,

Please note that Wikipedia's contributors come from many different countries and cultures. We have many different views, perspectives, opinions, and backgrounds, sometimes varying widely. Treating others with respect is a fundamental principle among Wikipedians, please find more details at Etiquette, No angry mastodons, No personal attacks and Don't be rude. The edit summary section must also be use according to Wikipedia's guidelines, please find more details at WP:EDITSUMCITE. Most importanly, Do not make personal attacks anywhere on Wikipedia. Comment on content, not on the contributor. Personal attacks harm the Wikipedia community and the collegial atmosphere needed to create a good encyclopedia. Derogatory comments about other editors may be removed by any editor. Repeated or egregious personal attacks may lead to sanctions including blocks or even bans. I note that these guidelines are not being respected by you at all, please find here-under a summary of the comments which you have provided in edit summaries;

1.      You want me to discuss with a guy who has a large Pakistani flag on his profile pic? What have you to gain by siding with him? THIS IS NOT AN EULOGY FOR A MAN WITH THE BLOOD OF A MILLION PEOPLE ON HIS HANDS! 

2.    Isn't it refreshing to have this trimmed down introduction back? Mention not, all the pleasure is mine 

3.    The fact that Kingroyos removed "Biharis" but didn't see any wrong in keeping all the other three indian ethnic groups speaks a lot. 

4.    Even better source ! Voilà, voilà 

5.    Even if I could understand the arguments behind not putting it in the intro, removing it altogether in the religion section is unashamedly hinduphobic. It's high time the editors who constantly vandalise the page admit their bias 

6.    I love adding these references. Kinda feel vindicated 

7.    It's quite ironic, because the version you are constantly going back to...was written by me

8.     Job done for the day. Can't wait to redo it again when necessary. :)

9.  References, references, references. Why ask for one when three can be furnished? 

10.  Again and again, the introduction is overbloated with territorial disputes. You don't find a whole paraghraph on Northern Ireland in the introduction to the UK ! 

11.   Same sex activity is perfectly legal. Sodomy is illegal irrespective of sexual orientation. Either write it properly or remove it altogether 

12. Poor English? Must be a joke

13. Reverted this bloated introduction with redundant data to the old version. The rest can be included in the body of the article. To all Geopeeps who are editing here, I'm the Manish guy Barbie referred to in his video, so no need to feel offended. 

14. Reverted to the former introduction. The current one was too bloated. Wonder why the noted fact about Mauritius being the only HIndu majority country of Africa gets removed constantly. Hinduphobia I guess. 

15. Reflects reality rather than the fantasies of some...

16. The usual clean-up

I hope these types of comments will not be repeated again. Thanks --Kingroyos (talk) 13:24, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Covid-19 table template RfC
If you hadn't noticed, there is currently an RfC on the Template:2019–20_coronavirus_pandemic_data talk page to determine whether overseas regions should be listed. As you've recently shown an interest on the matter I thought it would be good for you to know. Metropolitan (talk) 15:39, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 3
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mauritians of Indian origin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Christian ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Mauritians_of_Indian_origin check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Mauritians_of_Indian_origin?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:14, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Regarding Indic Scripts
Hi, I have noticed your talk section on the noticeboard for India related topics. I wholeheartedly agree with you, the blanket ban on Indic scripts makes no sense as India uses 2 official languages being Hindi and English. The ban seems to stem from some sort of decision taken close to a decade ago and is extremely regressive. To me the decision seems to stem from a mix of laziness and racism towards India and its cultural diversity. I only recently found out about this archaic rule and wanted to discuss it with you in detail so we could figure out how best to go about changing the MOS to include atleast Hindi in the lead and infoboxes of all India related articles.

Thanks and regards, Debitpixie (talk) 10:07, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Join the Months of African Cinema Global Contest!
Ýou can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

November 2020
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for making personal attacks towards other editors. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. 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:. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 13:54, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

You are allowed to express your opinion that someone who received a state funeral is important. You are not allowed to call other editors racist, even if you feel they may not understand topics in which you have interest or expertise. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 14:00, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for your behaviour at User_talk:The Rambling Man after a previous block for personal attacks did not appear to have any effect. You will need to address this issue in any unblock request.. 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:. Black Kite (talk) 20:01, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Enough of that. --Yamla (talk) 21:32, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

 Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive. ([ block log] • [ active blocks] • [ global blocks] • [//tools.wmflabs.org/xtools/autoblock/?user=&project=en.wikipedia.org autoblocks] • contribs • deleted contribs • [ abuse filter log] • [ creation log] • change block settings • [ unblock] • [ checkuser] ([ log]) )

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If the block is a CheckUser or Oversight block, was made by the Arbitration Committee or to enforce an arbitration decision (arbitration enforcement), or is unsuitable for public discussion, you should appeal to the Arbitration Committee. Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

what?
I saw your post on TRM's talk page and it's pretty misrepresentative. As can be seen here, it was TRM who nominated the article, and he never claimed that Sridevi lacked "notoriety", which would have been ridiculous. He simply said that he didn't want poorly sourced articles on the main page, a stance he has always taken, without prejudice. And holding a grudge for 2 years might seem a bit petty. Regards, TryKid&thinsp;[dubious – discuss] 20:22, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you . I think one thing old Manish might have overlooked is that my involvement in opening up RD so "super-notability" was discarded meant that we have now seen literally hundreds of RDs which Westerners would have considered obscure or not "worthy".  And yes, re-reading that ancient discussion, it seems pretty clear that throughout, all I'm doing is asking for the basic policies of WP:V and WP:BLP to be upheld.  Still, don't let any of that get in the way of accusations of racism and promoting systemic bias!  The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 21:34, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

The Months of African Cinema Contest Continues in November!
You can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

Welcome to the Months of African Cinema Global Contest!
Ýou can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

The Months of African Cinema Contest Continues in November!
You can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list