User talk:Dr Thaane Wala

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

This pageShahzadpur, Haryana, India has now good source i request to adminis that please read all article it is not copyright violation i wrote it myself pleas read again

It's obvious what your source was; changing a word here and there is not enough to prevent violating the copyright. See WP:Close paraphrasing for details. Huon (talk) 18:33, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

April 2017

Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Shahzadpur, Haryana, India, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. — JJMC89 (T·C) 14:28, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

i changed that text i written it myself it is not copyright violation please read article and ref source and do not make stupid descionsDr Thaane Wala (talk) 14:33, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

do you notice that Shahjadpur Upazila and Shahzadpur both are same i think one article should be delete what do you think

As I said on my talk page, the latter redirects to the former so people looking for the Upazila under the other title still end up at the content they are interested in. I don't see why the redirect should be deleted. Huon (talk) 19:16, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop continuing to remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Shahzadpur, Haryana, India, without resolving the problem that the template refers to. This may be considered disruptive editing. Further edits of this type may result in your account being blocked from editing. — JJMC89 (T·C) 04:23, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I apolozige, but can you tell me how to solve that?Dr Thaane Wala (talk) 04:57, 11 April 2017 (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 without adequate explanation, as you did at Yamunanagar, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 12:58, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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 Shahzadpur, Haryana, India. - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 13:00, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for telling i got itDr Thaane Wala (talk) 13:04, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

i am blocked but do not why? I bought a new mobile, check my history , i didn't do anything wrong, please unblock me

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Dr Thaane Wala (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

i am blocked but do not why? I bought a new mobile, check my history , i didn't do anything wrong, please unblock me

Decline reason:

You are blocked because technical evidence has confirmed that you were evading a previous block by abusing multiple accounts, in particular User:Randikasyap and User:Mahul kashyap. Huon (talk) 17:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

User:JJMC89 are you mad ?idiot i made these edits with good sources you can check that, why the fuck you revert that? Fucking idiotDr Thaane Wala (talk) 07:22, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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 • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation 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.

Yunshui ^雲 _水 07:27, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]