User talk:Vickle1777

Welcome to Wikipedia, Vickle1777! My name is ansuman. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you are curious about something, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. I'd love to assist you! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. I hope you like the place, enjoy editing and being a Wikipedian! Thank You! -- ɑηsuмaη  ʈ ᶏ ɭ Ϟ 05:40, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Note
Account created. I hope you have gone through notices which you have got on your IP tak page. If it is a shared IP and you haven't made those edits, please ignore those notices. Please familiarize yourself with Editing Policy and Copyright Violations before adding contents to articles. Any doubt drop a message on my talk page, I'd love to assist. Welcome again! -- ɑηsuмaη  ʈ ᶏ ɭ Ϟ 05:40, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

June 2012
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is invited to contribute, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Maharashtra, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Mdann52 (talk) 16:30, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made&#32;to Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale: you may already know about them, but you might find Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. Thank you. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 19:02, 27 June 2012 (UTC)


 * The page Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale has now been locked from editing. Please discuss the issue at Talk:Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale, demonstrating where possible how Wikipedia's policies support your position. Yunshui 雲&zwj;水 13:49, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Message
Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Operation Blue Star. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you.

What is Vandalism? huh, are you an Indian going to decide the fate of another Nation? Why you people can't listen to what is the truth. All authors with the names of the books, along with the exact excerpts, have been provided and you yet go on deleting the text calling it vandalism. This is, i would say, an Indian propoganda and a desperate attempt to undermine the truth cited by unbiased authors.Vickle1777 (talk)


 * Information.svg Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Operation Blue Star. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you.


 * [[Image:Information.svg|25px|alt=|link=]] Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living persons, as you did to Balwant Singh Rajoana. Thank you.

The edits you have done with Operation Blustar clearly means an Indian version of the story. How can you call people like Mark Tully the correspondent of BBC, Dr. Joyce Pettigrew- a world known Anthropologist, Mr A R Darshi (a Special Magisterate and Commissioner of Punjab as poorly referenced sources. You must meet Balwant Singh Rajoana or atleast read his interviews... and for sure, you still don't understand the meaning of Sikh... Vickle1777 (talk)

Please stop
Please stop removing citation needed tags, without providing references. Also take some time to read up Wikipedia policies and guidelines like WP:RS and WP:OR. And please discuss changes on the talk page instead of indulging in edit wars. You might also want to read up Dispute resolution. utcursch | talk 11:36, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

I guess you are the one indulging in the war... You can't go on deleting referenced text, and, at the same time, ask for every reference for other details. I might go through the WIKI policies... but u need to go through moral/ethical science. Stop the Indian Propoganda, a word of advice Vickle1777 (talk)

March 2013
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. utcursch | talk 11:44, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

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. utcursch | talk 12:23, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for informing about it. But, I guess the discussion board shall discuss of Indian inclination (of some users) and vandalisms caused on the pages related to Sikh history. e.g. Citations demanded for something (which are fact) is as much non-sense as citation required for human beings consuming milk. Vickle1777 (talk)


 * That's not how Wikipedia works. You can't keep adding whatever you believe to be the "correct" without bothering to cite any sources. Please see Verifiability.
 * On a side note, it's you who has a very shallow and one-sided knowledge of the history, which I guess you have gained from Khalistani propaganda material. If the Indian government's official version of Operation Blue Star is one extreme, your version is the other extreme.
 * Also, for someone who claims to be a Sikh, what is your source for this statement "Khalsa is the final temporal Guru of the Sikhs". Who replaced Guru Granth Sahib with "Guru Khalsa"? Please see Talk:Khalsa. utcursch | talk 12:54, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Go read the SGPC website.. you will get the idea! thanks Vickle1777 (talk)

By the way, the text you deleted from the Operation Bluestar page is properly referenced and from the authors of some reputation. So, you must, right now, stop making false claims of my information limited to "Khalistani propoganda material"... You must read "The Sikhs History" by Dr. Sangat Singh (an officer of Indian Administration of high offices).

This shall cease your doubts: http://sgpc.net/sikhism/sikhism4.asp I am hopefull, you shall not challenge the Guru status of the Khalsa after this... So, Khalsa is Guru Khalsa, the emodiment of Guru Granth Sahib. Vickle1777 (talk)


 * That's SGPC's interpretation, and I don't mind it in the article with an attribution and proper reference. That's still not a reason for you to remove tag, unless you actually add a citation.


 * The same goes Operation Bluestar. "XYZ says ABC" is not a citation, it is a statement that needs to be backed up with a citation (see Citing sources). Also, it's not a reason for removing 8 inline tags challenging unsourced statements and adding a self-published source. utcursch | talk 13:50, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Listen mate! I am stopping responding to you. By the way, you are also one of "XYZ says ABC". So, it is advised to you start some healthy thinking. Last communication to you. Bye bye dear IndianVickle1777 (talk)

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or  located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 13:54, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Operation Blue Star shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. ''That's revert #3. One more revert and the 3RR policy is violated. Consider this your final warning.'' StormContent (talk) 16:04, 11 March 2013 (UTC) You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 days for violation of Biographies of living persons policy and edit warring. 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 appeal this block by adding below this notice the text, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Ruslik_ Zero 19:12, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks for violation of Biographies of living persons policy and abusing multiple accounts. 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 appeal this block by adding below this notice the text, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Ruslik_ Zero 18:36, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Block extended to indef for repeated socking. --Rschen7754 07:57, 21 March 2013 (UTC)