User talk:Manchi Historian

September 2013

Hello, I'm DoorsAjar. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Kakatiya dynasty, with this edit, 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, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. DoorsAjar (talk) 02:45, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Kakatiya dynasty, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. NeilN ^{talk to me} 02:48, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to remove portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did to Kakatiya dynasty with this edit, you may be blocked from editing. DoorsAjar (talk) 02:48, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Kakatiya dynasty shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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.

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. NeilN ^{talk to me} 02:49, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is no evidence that the Kakatiyas belong to any specific caste. Now stop deleting everything. Jonny555 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:53, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Many of the historical sections are unsourced but you do need to use the article's talk page to explain the changes and deletions you propose. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 02:57, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Kakatiya dynasty with this edit, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 02:58, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for edit warring. 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 following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, 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.

Materialscientist (talk) 03:04, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]