User talk:Vrsrini

Image copyright problem with Image:Epw logo.gif
Thank you for uploading Image:Epw logo.gif. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Dark Falls  talk 08:31, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: A request
Got your message on my talk page. I checked and found Frontline (magazine) was already protected by another admin to stop edit war. Please read the following guidelines carefully, WP:3R, WP:RS, WP:NPOV and WP:CITE. Five pillars will be a good read too. If the other party is willing to discuss the issue on the talk page, you can request for a Third opinion. For other options, see Resolving disputes. As a last restort, when all else fails, post a message at WP:ANI and get admin help. Regards, Ganeshk  ( talk ) 02:35, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Welcome!
Since I did not see a formal welcome,

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or ask your question and then place  before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Regards, Ganeshk  ( talk ) 02:35, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Alison's signature
Hi there. Please refrain from using Alison's signature as your own - it gives the appearance that Alison posted a comment, when it was in fact you. That's not to say you can't use the same style; if you'd like to do this, insert the code below into the "signature" box of this page, check "Raw signature", and click "save" at the bottom. The code you should copy and paste is this:

...which, when you do the steps described and use the above code, will produce:

V r sr i ni (talk).

Note that "talk" won't be bolded - it simply is because you are on the page it usually links too. Hope this helps! Don't hesitate to contact me if you have any questions.

Kind regards, Anthøny  19:31, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Third Opinion
Thank you for listing your dispute at Third opinion. Your request did not follow the guidelines for listing disputes. These guidelines are in place because they make sure that the editor who writes the Third Opinion is not biased, and that (s)he can easily see what the dispute is about.

The description of the dispute should be concise and neutral, and you should sign with the timestamp only. A consice and neutral description means that only the subject matter of the dispute should be described, and not your (nor anyone else's) views on it. For example, in a dispute about reliable sources, do not write "He thinks this source is unreliable", but rather write "Dispute about the reliability of a source". To sign with only the timestamp, and without your username, use five tildes instead of four.

Your request for a Third Opinion may have been edited by another editor to follow the guidelines - feel free to edit it again if necessary. If the dispute you want to list is of such a nature that it cannot follow the guidelines, another part of the dispute resolution process may be able to help you. For example, Wikiquette alerts is a good place to alert others to a particular editor's behaviour. Thank you for going to the dispute resolution process with your dispute. User:Krator (t c) 08:32, 21 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Looking back through the diffs, I saw the mess that your edit had made, which was no doubt a significant factor in the reversion that took place.  Adrian  M. H.  10:31, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

3RR
Hey, heads up. You're on your third reversion of the content at Frontline (magazine) in the last 24 hours. Also, I would recommend, that you engage the user you are disagreeing with, in discussion, instead of just reverting them. This is a content dispute, not vandalism. Also, I'd like to ask you to review Our policies on legal threats. Edit summaries such as "Discussion comments have not been answered by vandal. Libel has been continued. Alternate edit suggested: shabby, incomplete, and libelous." might lead users to beleive that you are considering taking off-wiki action against them.

At this time, I have blocked the other user you were edit warring with, for 3rr.

Anyhow, if you have any questions, or, if you need anything, feel free to leave a message on my talk page. SQL(Query Me!) 10:54, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

SQL,

Thanks for your intervention. I understand the reasons for the blocking.

Let me tell you the reasons behind the current impasse. The user "Liberal Democrat" contested that the word, "Anti-Imperialist" can't be suffixed to the Frontline magazine. I had provided the niche/genre of the magazine and quoted primary sources for the contention, "Anti-Imperialist". The edit has been reverted to a shabby alternate one, which is more abusive rather than a wikipedic content of the magazine. When initially the contention of "Anti-imperailism" was buttressed with primary sources, the new criticism of my edit was that it was "patronisation". It is clear that the person opposed to the edit doesn't agree with the genre and is interested only in libel. This is untenable. Time and again, the things have been pointed out in the discussion page, but of no avail.

Vrsrini 11:16, 3 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Hmm. Well, you've been pretty reasonable about this, and, I do see that you were trying to discuss it on the talk page. Also, as the page is protected now anyhow, I'm going to drop your block to 1 hour. Thanks, for understanding. SQL(Query Me!) 11:36, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

October 2007
You have been blocked from editing for in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule. Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text below. SQL(Query Me!) 10:59, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Third Opinion (again)
Thank you for listing your dispute at Third opinion. Your request did not follow the guidelines for listing disputes. These guidelines are in place because they make sure that the editor who writes the Third Opinion is not biased, and that (s)he can easily see what the dispute is about.

The description of the dispute should be concise and neutral, and you should sign with the timestamp only. A concise and neutral description means that only the subject matter of the dispute should be described, and not your (nor anyone else's) views on it. For example, in a dispute about reliable sources, do not write "He thinks this source is unreliable", but rather write "Dispute about the reliability of a source". To sign with only the timestamp, and without your username, use five tildes instead of four.

Your request for a Third Opinion may have been edited by another editor to follow the guidelines - feel free to edit it again if necessary. If the dispute is of such a nature that it cannot follow the guidelines, another part of the dispute resolution process may be able to help you. For example, Wikiquette alerts is a good place to alert others to a particular editor's behaviour. Thank you for opting to use the dispute resolution process.  Adrian  M. H.  11:56, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Request for arbitration
A request for arbitration has been filed listing you as a party. Please leave a statement if you so desire. Cheers,  Daniel  13:21, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

December 2008
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, you may not know that Wikipedia has a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Using different styles throughout the encyclopedia makes it harder to read. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. digitalmischief (talk) 05:58, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Janam (disambiguation)
You recently created a disambiguation page for uses of the word Janam. Unfortunately, you gave it the title Diasmbiguation page, which would not be helpful to users. I have moved it to Janam (disambiguation), which fits Wikipedia conventions and would make it a useful search term. Rklear (talk) 09:32, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi
Plz. took a look at CPIM page, some times a week, some of the people are vandalizing it, and stopping others by not making them necessary changes, and reverting back their entire edits.

Comradely Regards. -Viplovecomm (talk) 21:18, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Pragoti (disambiguation)


The article Pragoti (disambiguation) has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * dab with only one link, if another blue link comes up, it can be hat noted from primary

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing  will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  08:26, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Welcome and response
Welcome!

Hello, Vrsrini, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type helpme on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  10:04, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Starting an article
 * Your first article
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

This is in response to your note on my talk page, the links in the above welcome message, especially WP:YFA will be really helpful. Once you read that, you can use the article wizard to create an article. Make sure that there are reliable source references to show notability. cheers. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  10:04, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Newsclick for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Newsclick 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/Newsclick until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. ~ Winged Blades Godric 09:47, 8 May 2018 (UTC)