User talk:Rudhr.rudhr.54

Dhedh
Hi, Wikipedia is not censored and is intended to reflect what is said by reliable sources. As such, even though you may not like it, you cannot make changes such as the ones you recently tried to do at the Dhedh article. - Sitush (talk) 04:16, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

July 2017
Hello, I'm JimVC3. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Dhedh have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. JimVC3 (talk) 17:23, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Dhedh shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 your 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.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   09:32, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Alert
- Sitush (talk) 14:26, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

July 2017
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Vankar. Sitush (talk) 14:27, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did at Dhedh. Sitush (talk) 15:52, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. 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:. Vanamonde (talk) 16:09, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Rudhr, as I'm sure you have noticed, I have blocked you from editing. Verifiability is a core policy on Wikipedia. All content needs to be supported by reliable sources. Also, content that is supported by sources should not be removed with no explanation. That is considered disruptive, and you can be blocked for it. Please, do not see this as a punishment, but as an opportunity to read and understand the policies I have linked here, so that you may contribute constructively in the future. Please also note that using another account to avoid this block is prohibited; and by doing so, you will not ever get a page to look like what you want, because it can and will be protected. Regards, Vanamonde (talk) 16:13, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

What are you doing?
You removed what appear to be two valid citations and mentioned some putative source in your edit summary. High school books are not usually considered to be reliable sources on Wikipedia and, of course, Indian high school books have had particular problems (eg: the NCERT scandal). Furthermore, and I am fairly sure I have told you this somewhere before, our policy regarding neutrality means that we should not remove well-sourced statements but rather show all valid opinions regarding the matter. - Sitush (talk) 04:51, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

August 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:. Yunshui 雲 水 07:26, 2 August 2017 (UTC) No sooner did the block expire than you went straight back to the exact same behaviour (the threats don't exactly help your case either). Your account is now blocked indefinitely; you will need to convince an administrator that you can contribute productively here before you will be allowed to edit again. Yunshui 雲 水 07:28, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

unblock
Yes I said that because he give me a warning to block me because I am not give a reliable source but now I give a reliable source so why you block me now ? Rudhr.rudhr.54 (talk) 13:27, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Unblock
Rudhr.rudhr.54 (talk) 13:42, 2 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Rudhr, it looks like you did in fact sock - here and . The first of those is where the constitutional issue mentioned, which you note above. Wikipedia isn't based in India and is not censored - the Indian constitution has no bearing on the content of our articles. - Sitush (talk) 05:10, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

August 2017
 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] • [ • 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. only (talk) 10:43, 8 August 2017 (UTC) --UTRSBot (talk) 20:55, 7 September 2017 (UTC) --UTRSBot (talk) 19:40, 2 November 2017 (UTC)