User talk:D mavi

Welcome!

Hello, D mavi, 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:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing 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 {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! - Sitush (talk) 20:21, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rajput

Hi, the examples given at Rajput are just that, examples. There is no need to include every possible community and there is certainly no need to include one that some people have objected to in the past. Sometimes it is better for the sake of peace and quiet to ignore controversial issues when they add nothing to the point that a statement is making. Furthermore, the source does not mention the Gurjars and so you would need to incorporate a modern reliable source into the statement in order to provide verifiability. This could be done - see WP:Citing sources - but, really, there is little point in this instance. - Sitush (talk) 08:49, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

May 2013

Hello, I'm Sitush. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Rajput without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry: I restored the removed content. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Sitush (talk) 11:34, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, you did explain why but your rationale is invalid. You need to be pretty careful when removing statements that are reliably sourced. It is perfectly ok for us to show differing opinions but, for example, removing one in favour of another is usually unacceptable. Please discuss your concerns at Talk:Rajput otherwise it is possible that you will find yourself blocked for edit warring. As I have said recently, the position of Gurjars has frequently caused problems on Wikipedia, usually because members of that community want to "puff up" their status. - Sitush (talk) 11:39, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Rajput shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—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—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—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. Sitush (talk) 11:51, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have now gone well beyonf three reverts with this edit. Furthermore, the source is right there in the article. Please self-revert before you find yourself blocked from contributing. - Sitush (talk) 13:07, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a short time for your disruption caused by edit warring and violation of the three-revert rule. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:52, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your addition to Rajput has been reverted and the reason has been explained to you, but you are edit warring to put it back. If you wish to make that addition again, you need to discuss it at Talk:Rajput and seek a consensus supporting you. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:55, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]