User talk:RohilPCS

Hi, I see you've been here a while, doing some nice work on foreign relation articles. I noticed you created People's Republic of China-Islamic Republic of Iran relations, but it was almost an exact copy of People's Republic of China – Iran relations, so I turned it into a redirect. Did you mean to do something else? Let me know if you need any help.

Whilst I'm here, have a belated welcome message - I'm afraid a lot of it's aimed at completely new editors, but some of the links might be useful. --Physics is all gnomes (talk) 23:50, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Reversion
Your last edit to List of current and future lunar missions is vandalism and has been reverted.--119.153.96.20 (talk) 16:13, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Template:Foreign relations of South Africa
Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. We always appreciate when users upload new images. However, it appears that one or more of the images you have recently uploaded or added to an article may fail our non-free image policy. Most often, this involves editors uploading or using a copyrighted image of a living person. For other possible reasons, please read up on our Non-free image criteria. Please note that we take very seriously our criteria on non-free image uploads and users who repeatedly upload or misuse non-free images may be blocked from editing. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. ΔT The only constant 15:51, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

April 2011
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Known and Unknown: A Memoir, you may be blocked from editing. Removing Hanson's review because you don't like Hanson or Rumsfeld is a violation of Wikipedia's NPOV policy. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 21:03, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Please stop. Wikipedia is not censored. Any further changes which have the effect of censoring an article, such as you did to India–Palestine relations, will be regarded as vandalism. If you continue in this manner, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Lihaas (talk) 17:20, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Conspiracy Theory
In the future, if you want to send me a message about something, and bring up my name, then post it to my talk page and not the article's edit summary like you did with Conspiracy Theory with Jesse Ventura‎. Thanks. Cyberia23 (talk) 06:03, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Srebrenica genocide
RohilPCS, I have no disagreement with your comments about Geller, but the point is that the reference to her you deleted is part of the overall treatment of the people who for one reason or another refuse to accept the facts or the description of genocide in relation to Srebrenica. The person who included her was identifying her position, not supporting it. Geller is not alone as a right-wing Islamophobe - I think it tells us something that Srebrenica often provides a vehicle for their Islamophobia and the contradiction of values they claim to espouse. Denial exists (though fortunately less strongly than it did in the past when there were long battles over this section of the Srebrenica article). It's informativetgo see how That's why it's important to identify the deniers, set out the basis of the denial and look at the defects in the argument, rather than just pretend they don't exist.Opbeith (talk) 21:45, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

June 2011
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on 10 Downing Street. 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. In particular, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; 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 continue edit warring, you may be blocked from editing. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:51, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

August 2011
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did at Reactions to the International Court of Justice advisory opinion on Kosovo's declaration of independence, you may be blocked from editing. --Avala (talk) 00:10, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:Foreign relations of Asia templates


A tag has been placed on Template:Foreign relations of Asia templates requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it must be substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes ( ).

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by visiting the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but 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 yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you.  Claret Ash  13:50, 28 February 2012 (UTC)