User talk:Fahad AKM

Welcome!

Hello, Fahad AKM, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Amb (princely state). I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages 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 click here to ask for help here on your talk page and a volunteer will visit you here shortly. Again, welcome! : Noyster (talk), 13:26, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

April 2015

Hello, I'm Sitush. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Tanoli, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page.

Please do not use unreliable sources, such as works from the British Raj era, in caste-related articles. The consensus has long been that they are not worth the paper they were printed on. Thanks. Sitush (talk) 16:31, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Tanoli shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your 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. Sitush (talk) 16:40, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

April 2016

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Tanoli, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Please discuss your changes on the respective talk page, as the references you are providing fail our requirements as a reliable source. For further details, please review Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. Thank you, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 18:55, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am becoming fed up of reverting your attempts to insert pseudo-scientific/pseudo-historical nonsense written in the 1830s etc at the Tanoli article. We do not accept sources from that period because they are known to be highly unreliable. - Sitush (talk) 15:14, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

May 2016

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Tanoli. As has been expressed to you multiple times over the course of several months, please cease and desist utilization of non-reliable sources. Thank you, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 21:30, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for repeatedly re-adding material based on sources that other editors deem to be unreliable, despite being asked to stop multiple times. 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 first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:11, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You have been engaged in a slow edit war against multiple other editors at the the article Tanoli, and this must stop. If you have changes reverted, you need to start a discussion on the article talk page, identify the sources you wish to use, and seek a consensus for your preferred version. But looking at your history, I don't see a single edit to any talk page since you have been here. If you continue with this approach to editing once your block expires, you should expect future blocks to escalate. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:18, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring again

You've just done the same thing again that you were blocked for last time. You've inserted material at the tanoli article that is an unattributed copy/paste of previously rejected material at your preferred article. Don't. Please. - Sitush (talk) 16:40, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sanctions

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

- Sitush (talk) 16:41, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]