User talk:Crsnadar

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Crsnadar, 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:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Rosiestep (talk) 14:56, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

June 2012

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Jat people. When removing content, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the content has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:13, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia community has permitted administrators to impose discretionary sanctions on any editor who is active on any page about social groups, explicitly including caste associations and political parties, related to India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal. Discretionary sanctions can be used against an editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process. If you engage in further inappropriate behavior in this area, you may be placed under sanctions, which can include blocks, a revert limitation, or an article ban. The discussion leading to the imposition of these sanctions can be read here.

Please familiarise yourself with the information page at Wikipedia:General sanctions.

Please stop removing sourced content from Jat people and replacing it with unsourced content, or you will be blocked from editing in accordance with the above sanctions. Please read WP:RS to discover what reliable sources are, and do not make any changes without citing them - and do not repeat your current changes without first discussing them in the talk page and getting a consensus. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:26, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as seen in Jat people, you may be blocked from editing. Sudo Ghost 21:31, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for ignoring the warnings above, and continuing to edit in violation of the sanctions you have been informed of. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:32, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Censorship

Wikipedia is not censored. You are going to find yourself blocked again if you persist in contributions such as your most recent one at Rajput. Rightly or wrongly, statements in Wikipedia articles have to be verifiable using reliable sources. If you do not like a statement then find some reliable sources that say differently, present them on the relevant article's talk page and seek discussion. - Sitush (talk) 21:26, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for repeatedly removing sourced content from articles about Indian castes, contrary to the sanctions explained above. 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 the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:28, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Once your block expires, if you wish to remove content controversially from any articles, please discuss it on the article talk page first, and achieve a consensus for its removal. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:31, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deceptive editing at 36 royal races

Greetings, your edit at 36 royal races completely changed the intent of cited statements in order to push a pro-Jat viewpoint. Do you not see how changing a direct quote from the Calcutta Review of the 1870s is effectively lying to the readers? The quote said X, you change it to Y, and that is not what the quote said. I hope you just made the edit without thinking about it being a quote, but in whatever case it is unhelpful.

If you want to better-present the Jat view of the 36 Races, then find proper sourcing stating those arguments. Do not warp existing data to mislead the reader. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:07, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

October 2012

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for repeated POV-pushing on articles related to Jats. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:35, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]