User talk:Obiwana

September 2022
Hello, I'm LilianaUwU. I noticed that you recently removed content from Kuṭṭaka without adequately 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; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your 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. Liliana UwU (talk / contribs) 06:05, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Kuṭṭaka, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. Liliana UwU (talk / contribs) 06:06, 28 September 2022 (UTC)


 * There is no citation in many of the paragraph in Wikipedia that's why I am removing it Obiwana (talk) 06:07, 28 September 2022 (UTC)


 * You can't just remove the whole paragraphs... Liliana UwU  (talk / contribs) 06:08, 28 September 2022 (UTC)


 * But how can it be a reliable without any citation Obiwana (talk) 06:08, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Welcome!
Hi Obiwana! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Happy editing! FNN 💎 Wiki 06:05, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

October 2022
Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to History of genetics, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 12:28, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Important Notice
Doug Weller talk 14:25, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Fibonacci number
Your recent editing history at Fibonacci number 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; read about 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. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:31, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

Your edit to Fibonacci number has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images&mdash;you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Copying text from other sources for more information. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 17:54, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

November 2022
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Dowry have been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 09:48, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
 * 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: Dowry was changed by Obiwana (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.860853 on 2022-11-22T09:48:35+00:00

Recent edit reversion
In this edit here, I reverted some information that appears to be a violation of our copyright policy.

I provided a brief summary of the problem in the edit summary, which should be visible just below my name. You can also click on the "view history" tab in the article to see the recent history of the article. This should be an edit with my name, and a parenthetical comment explaining why your edit was reverted. If that information is not sufficient to explain the situation, please ask.

I do occasionally make mistakes. We get hundreds of reports of potential copyright violations every week, and sometimes there are false positives, for a variety of reasons. (Perhaps the material was moved from another Wikipedia article, or the material was properly licensed but the license information was not obvious, or the material is in the public domain but I didn't realize it was public domain, and there can be other situations generating a report to our Copy Patrol tool that turn out not to be actual copyright violations.) If you think my edit was mistaken, please politely let me know and I will investigate. S Philbrick (Talk)  14:13, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Recent edit reversion
In this edit here, I reverted some information that appears to be a violation of our copyright policy.

I provided a brief summary of the problem in the edit summary, which should be visible just below my name. You can also click on the "view history" tab in the article to see the recent history of the article. This should be an edit with my name, and a parenthetical comment explaining why your edit was reverted. If that information is not sufficient to explain the situation, please ask.

I do occasionally make mistakes. We get hundreds of reports of potential copyright violations every week, and sometimes there are false positives, for a variety of reasons. (Perhaps the material was moved from another Wikipedia article, or the material was properly licensed but the license information was not obvious, or the material is in the public domain but I didn't realize it was public domain, and there can be other situations generating a report to our Copy Patrol tool that turn out not to be actual copyright violations.) If you think my edit was mistaken, please politely let me know and I will investigate. S Philbrick (Talk)  14:15, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

I have corrected my article but if there is any copyright issues then I will generate it but please don't delete the full article just inform me i will make modifications Obiwana (talk) 15:56, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Inca empire
Trepanation was common among the Inca Surgeons as they are used to treat the head injury of the person who got injured in a combat.This includes removing the scalp tissue and boring the hole in the skull of the patient to allow of reducing of swelling and a draining of fluid.These techniques were so useful that only 17 to 25 percent of Inca patients died compared to 46 to 56 percent during the American civil war.

Aztecs
Aztecs also used various techniques of surgery ranging from Trepanation to therapeutic arthrocentries and c. They even used tractions and counter traction to reduce fractures and sprains and used splints to immoblize breaks.Aztec Surgeons were even the first to practice intramedullary fixation using wooden pegs as intramedullary rays to reunite the pieces of bone .They also practiced the procedure for therapeutic arthrocentries where human hair and cactus where used as sutures with cactus or bone needle. Is it ok Obiwana (talk) 16:13, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Good faith
Your recent rants at Talk:History of calculus replying to decade old posts where the issue has long been resolved are quite pointless. There is no need to attack other editors, especially after that length of time. Please assume good faith in future and stick to discussing the articles, not the editors, in future. SpinningSpark 17:12, 14 December 2022 (UTC)


 * @Obiwana And not only do they make you look bad, but if this sort of attack on Indians continues you may be banned from the topic area, please read the important notice above which you have apparently ignored. Doug Weller  talk 19:43, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Copying within Wipedia
You did not identify the source of the material in your edit. It appears to be 2022 Pakistani airstrikes in Afghanistan. Copying within Wikipedia is acceptable but it must be attributed.

This type of edit does get picked up by Copy Patrol and a good edit summary helps to make sure we don't accidentally revert it. However, for future use, would you note the best practices wording as outlined at Copying_within_Wikipedia? In particular, linking to the source article and adding the phrase "see that page's history for attribution" helps ensure that proper attribution is preserved.

While best practices are that attribution should be added to the edit summary at the time the edit is made, the linked article on best practices describes the appropriate steps to add attribution after the fact. I hope you will do so.-- S Philbrick (Talk)  00:59, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

I've noticed that this guideline is not very well known, even among editors with tens of thousands of edits, so it isn't surprising that I point this out to some veteran editors, but there are some t's that need to be crossed. S Philbrick  (Talk)  00:59, 15 December 2022 (UTC)


 * @Sphilbrick I need to see if all or any of the sources mention war crimes.  Doug Weller  talk 09:52, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

December 2022
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text into Pakistan war crimes from another page. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g.,. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted copied template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. —  Red-tailed hawk (nest) 04:56, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank red tailed hawk you can make an another article based on war crimes committed by Pakistan Obiwana (talk) 14:06, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
 * That reply indicates to me that you have not understood the issue. You must not copy material in Wikipedia without making clear where it came from.  Inviting the editor to create another article does not fix the problem. SpinningSpark 14:46, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Pakistan war crimes for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Pakistan war crimes 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/Pakistan war crimes until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished. Doug Weller talk 12:41, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Hlo please explain me why we are deleting the article Obiwana (talk) 14:02, 15 December 2022 (UTC)


 * It's a terrible mess. Many references can't be checked because you copied and pasted the text without the details of the citations. Also sources need to mention war crimes, and those I checked don't. Doug Weller  talk 14:05, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

January 2023
You are suspected of sockpuppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, then, if you wish to do so, respond to the evidence at Sockpuppet investigations/Obiwana. Thank you. Mako001 (C) (T)  🇺🇦 14:40, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Ok Obiwana (talk) 15:11, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

It's not me it's some users who are using it Obiwana (talk) 15:17, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Blocked for sockpuppetry
Thank you for the submission he was constantly attacking me and vandalising the Wiki page Obiwana (talk) 19:16, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Alejandro Alagón Cano for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Alejandro Alagón Cano 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/Alejandro Alagón Cano until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished. &#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 13:32, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Community banned per 3X
Due to your repeated use of of sockpuppets, you are hereby banned from editing by the community per WP:3X. Girth Summit  (blether) 16:34, 5 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Hello,man I am extremely sorry for what I have did during that time.I didn't knew anything at all about wikipedia sockpuppetry so I did it.I request you that next time I won't be involved in any sockpuppetry again and I will continue to edit in my account only Obiwana (talk) 16:47, 13 September 2023 (UTC)