User talk:Kaverijha23

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Kaverijha23, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially what you did for Hyderabad, India. 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 {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! TheMike •^{Wassup doc?} 13:49, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Random edit summaries

Why do some of your edit summaries bear little relation to your edits? You removed line breaks in the article's main body and labeled the edit "infobox". You removed two paragraphs of info with the edit summary "NO SUCH TEMPLATE REQUIRED". Maybe you don't know what a template or an infobox is? Overall your edits to Rakta Charitra were not as destructive as I thought they were going to be. But I would offer this advice: DON'T SHOUT ALL THE TIME IN YOUR EDIT SUMMARIES (using all capital letters is interpreted as shouting) and make your edit summaries better reflect what you're doing in the edits! Thanks. AtticusX (talk) 17:35, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Page protection

You can request page protection here: Wikipedia:Requests for page protection

Persistant vandalism is generally required before protection is granted, I am not sure the threshold is met on this article. A request to semi protect articles for all telagu actors would not be granted. Active Banana (^bananaphone 19:17, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, it is in part you that is making a bad edit too: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Actors_and_Filmmakers#Filmography_tables clearly says not to use rowspan. Please fix your mistake. DMacks (talk) 16:33, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

Kindly stop edit warring and use the talk page if you disagree on something. You have reverted everything, edited as you wish sourced information and added unsourced info. If you continue that way, I'll have to file a report against you. Shahid • ^Talk2me 20:30, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please revert your edits because they are not correct and use the talk page. Your behaviour is most disruptive and will not be taken lightly. Shahid • ^Talk2me 20:34, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

January 2011

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Filmfare Awards. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted or removed.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor then please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive; until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively could result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Pol430 talk to me 20:44, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Article talk page

Per your edit summary that you dont know how to use talk pages, click on the "discussion" tab at the top of the article page, it will take you here: Talk:Filmfare Awards where you can initiate or respond to the appropriate conversation. Active Banana (^bananaphone 20:49, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Specifically, the conversation has begun at: Talk:Filmfare_Awards#Notice. Active Banana (^bananaphone 20:55, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring and name calling

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Filmfare Awards. Users who edit disruptively or refuse to collaborate with others may be blocked if they continue.

In particular, the three-revert rule states that:

Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
Editors violating the rule will usually be blocked for 24 hours for a first incident.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes. Work towards wording, and content that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Active Banana (^bananaphone 20:52, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In addtion, your comments such as [[1]] are not appropriate. Treat other editors civilly and do not make random accusations of "pupperty". Active Banana (^bananaphone 20:54, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you're 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.

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.

Nakon 20:56, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Due to your clear block evasion via an IP address, I have reset your block and extended it to 3 days; your block now expires 3 days from now. You are advised that any further evasion of your block may lead to you being indefinitely blocked. Regards, –MuZemike 21:31, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Although you started messaging me while evading a block, I'll reply. First, I know who you are and we have already been in a disagreement once on the National Film Awards pages. In this case, if both Filmfare and Filmfare South are given by The Times Group, then it can be mentionedin an article about The Times Group. The article on Filmfare Awards should have info only about them, and not the South awards. A separate article about the Southern awards already exists, and that's where info about them actually belongs.

Also, no one says Filmfare is the equivalent of the Oscars. We say it is referred to as such, which is sourced to reliable sources. Shahid • ^Talk2me 21:43, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Shshshsh is a vandal

{{unblock|IP address is part of a large range that has been blocked to prevent an abusive user from vandalizing your site. Unfortunately, while this adequately protects your site, it does affect a large number of innocent users. user shahid - Shshshsh is (dongamundakoduku) is abusing me constantly with personal opinions - rangeblocks like this are a last resort.}}

Halo

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).

Kaverijha23 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

for gods sake leave this user alone - this Shshshsh is a sockpuppet with user name active banana - i have explained all my edits in edit pages this user Shshshsh is clubbed with this scoundrel 3=MuZemike and abusing me for gods sake for gods sake before blocking em please send mesage to why ur blocking me - i am doing valuble contributions to wikipedis for gods sake scoundrels leave this user name alone which is becoming victim like abusing accounts like padmalakshmisx - Shshshs is sockpuppeting against me with username padmalakshmisx AND ACTIVE BANANA muslim dongmundakoduku shahid

Decline reason:

your unblock requests do not address your reason for blocking, it's them, not me is not a valid reason; you have been informed that you have been blocked for using multiple accounts in a manner against site policy. If you continue to make similar unblock requests, your talk page access will be removed.

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.

—SpacemanSpiff 07:58, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

leave me alone for gods sake

{{unblock-ip|1=121.247.113.58|2=Abusing [[WP:Sock puppetry|multiple accounts]]: [[User:Padmalakshmisx]]|3=MuZemike}}

Warning

Do not remove declined unblock requests from your talk page, if you continue to do so, your talk page rights will be removed. —SpacemanSpiff 08:16, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

mr muzemike

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).

Kaverijha23 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

that is what im saying mr muzemike (im not talking in french - for god sake please keep this request in my talk page)that it is a IP address and used by kaverijha23 and most of them were constructive edits only and give one more chance so that from now i will do all my edits with kaverijha23 username only from my internet users and will not allow other users to use wikipedia in my net cafe now u get it??? or u still want to abuse me - keep this request as it has answer to ur abusive reasons and remove other requests

Decline reason:

You have a long string of accounts that you have used. Taken in conjunction with your borderline-attack unblock request, I see no reason to unblock you. TN X Man 13:57, 28 January 2011 (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.

request edit continued

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).

Kaverijha23 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

that is what I am saying dear admin, that the long chain of names used on a single IP are not mine, and im requesting u to give me one more chance and allow editing for only kaverijha23 as all the edits done by me are all informative and constructive, and further, i only use kavaerijha23 on this IP, but this is an internet cafe different people login on same IP, i request your kind self to consider a 24 to 48 hour block, and allow me to resume editing after1-2 days

Decline reason:

One unblock request at a time, please. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:58, 28 January 2011 (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.

After reviewing the IP information and the computers used, I have a very hard time believing they are not you. TN X Man 16:38, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Essential request

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).

Kaverijha23 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

you are not getting it - the users shahid Shsshshsh and active banana are abusing other editors like this - I am asking u to remove my block after 24 hours and not now,I am also acknowledging u that kaverijha23 did constructive edits only in the last 4-5 days, what gurantee u can give that in future if i use kaveri jha to edit, then this Shshshsh blinly keeps sock pupptry when ever i do edits as kaveri jha, this is a internet cafe with same IP,I will only edited with user name kaverijha23 from december 25, so where is the question of sock puppetry for this IP address and further from now also i only use the name kaverijha 23 , the other names associated with this Ip are not in use for edits from past 2 months,so please understand this situation so that in future u dont block me, im asking u to give me a chance, in the next 24 hours please unblock it, 3 months of block is ridiculous

Decline reason:

No, you are "not getting it". I don't have checkuser access, but I have the utmost trust in and esteem for the two editors who do who have come to the conclusion that you have abused multiple accounts or IPs. That aside, your unblock request should address your own conduct, not that of others. Since you are basically using these requests to attack other editors, I am revoking your talk page access. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:02, 28 January 2011 (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.