User talk:Mariam57

Welcome!
  Hello, !  Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

  Getting Started

Tutorial Learn everything you need to know to get started. Introduction to contributing • Editing

• Referencing

• Images

• Tables

• Policies and guidelines

• Talk pages

• Navigating

• Manual of Style

The Teahouse Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.

The Task Center Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help.

Tips 
 * Don't be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
 * It's normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don't worry if you don't understand everything at first—it's fine to edit using common sense.
 * If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue at the article's talk page. Sign your messages with four tildes ( ~ ), be civil, and don't restore the edit unless there is consensus.
 * When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
 * If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
 * Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.

Happy editing! Cheers, Dinesh | Talk 05:17, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

gdp of Delhi at Delhi wiki page
Hello, i noticed you reverted my edit at Delhi wiki page the source i have given is from a legitimate global organization 'visul capitalist' its not a poor source https://www.visualcapitalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Global-Wealth-PPP-Distribution.html here is the link please check properly delhis nominal gdp is well over 200 billion 272.603 billion to be exact and ppp is 594.884 billion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vijaydanny (talk • contribs) 13:31, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, which type of sources are reliable then please read WP:RS article. You'll understand which type of sources are considered reliable sources in wikipedia. As far as Delhi source is concerned I've put official government's data. Whereas the source you added not at all reliable moreover the gdp and per capita figures aren't mentioned in those sources. Just remember whenever update any gdp figures of a country or city always added from official government website or from World Bank or IMF. Thanks--Mariam57 (talk) 05:15, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

March 2022
Please do not add or change content, as you did at North America, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. BilCat (talk) 06:47, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi Thanks for notifying me. I have added the current source from IMF. Just click on the Region tab and you'll get continent wise GDP breakup. Thanks--Mariam57 (talk) 05:06, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Refrain from removing content and sources when there is already a consensus
Hello Mariam57, as from your recent contributions, you have been removing contents from wikipedia articles with a misleading reason of Unreliability which did not appear to describe the change you made to All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, Trinamool Congress, Biju Janata Dal, Aam Aadmi Party. For your information, as per Usage by Others Sources Policy, either use Article Talkpage if you don't know about the Consensus or visit Wikiproject Category the article is included in, for example in this case, Wikiproject Indian Politics.

Happy Editing, Sneha04   💬 05:30, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, yes I saw the discussion that took place in the Wikiproject Indian Politics regarding electios.in website. Anyway since we lack credible source therefore other editors agreed to use this source. But if we don't provide reliable sources for other ideology then I'll remove them straight away. Thank you!--Mariam57 (talk) 06:58, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Glad you understood. From your interests, Citation Tools can ease your purpose of aspiration. Keep it up! Sneha04   💬 07:12, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

April 2022
Your recent editing history at Communist Party of India (Marxist) 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 the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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 do not violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Pavlov2 (talk) 07:57, 4 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi Sorry I went into edit war but User:1234comrade is constantly adding list of founders without providing adequate sources. Anyway if he adds anything further I shall take him to WP:ANI to get it resolved with the help of administrator. Thanks--Mariam57 (talk) 08:01, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks, just take care and happy editting. Pavlov2 (talk) 08:02, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Important Notice
Doug Weller talk 09:06, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Lists of uncited references
Please don't add lists of uncited references. That goes against wikipedia's MOS Lists (link at the article talk page). Additionally please review wp:BRD. You made a BOLD, good faith change. That change was rightly challenged. Thus per the rules of consensus Wp:CON, do not restore the disputed edit without getting talk page consensus first. Springee (talk) 12:36, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Please don't ping me over here. Already discussion taking place in the article talk page. You have the full authority to disagree with me. Thanks--Mariam57 (talk) 12:52, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Since you chose to restore the disputed content and didn't take the concerns of others to heart... Springee (talk) 13:05, 18 April 2022 (UTC) 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 the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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 do not violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

May 2022
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Bacopa monnieri, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Please read the talk page discussion and FDA publications - none of the implied effects is proven, and the uses are considered a hoax, which also applies to Ayurveda. Zefr (talk) 23:21, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for notifying's me I did not check properly in the talk page of Bacopa monnieri. Kindly check on Nootropic article. In this article absurd claims have been made regarding this plant and other plant as well. I have removed those stuff.--Mariam57 (talk) 15:30, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Blocked as a sockpuppet
 You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts&#32;as a sockpuppet of &#32;per the evidence presented at Sockpuppet investigations/Kkm010. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. 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:. --Blablubbs (talk) 06:15, 3 July 2022 (UTC)