User talk:Megawave111

Welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia

Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
No edit warring or abuse of multiple accounts.
If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject. Deliberately adding such content or otherwise editing articles maliciously is considered vandalism; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Kautilya3 (talk) 16:44, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

August 2016

Hello, I'm Kautilya3. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Bhāratas without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Please look through the policies of Wikipedia, especially "The five pillars" articles. Making edits based on your personal opinions will lead to sanctions. Kautilya3 (talk) 16:49, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Megawave111, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Megawave111! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Soni (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:03, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

August 2016

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Bharatas. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
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 a version 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 you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Kautilya3 (talk) 16:14, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ARBIPA sanctions alert

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 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.

Kautilya3 (talk) 16:16, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

August 2016

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to India, did not appear constructive and have been undone. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. regentspark (comment) 14:49, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that you aren't here to contribute constructively or collaboratively. You've already been warned about discretionary sanctions. PLease follow policies properly or you are likely to find your editing privileges revoked. —SpacemanSpiff 11:21, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on India. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
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 a version 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 you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. —SpacemanSpiff 11:51, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Vedic period, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Removing reliably sourced content because it doesn't suit your POV is clearly not allowed. —SpacemanSpiff 13:46, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. I am glad to see that you are discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Talk:South Asia are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic or unrelated topics. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. And also Talk:Indian subcontinent. Please avoid WP:SOAPBOX debtes, excessive personal opinions, and generally wasting people's time. Please state your points clearly and give reliable sources for any claims. Kautilya3 (talk) 14:41, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for tendentious editing and edit-warring on India-related topics. See the warnings above. This block is in the nature of a shot across the bow; if you persist in unconstructive editing and WP:IDHT behaviour after it expires, you run the risk of being topic banned from India- and Pakistan-related articles per the discretionary sanctions alert above[1]. 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 ~~~~}}. Bishonen | talk 15:49, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Block due to "disruptive" editing

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).

Megawave111 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

@User:Bishonen: The issue is over an unverifiable source about an issue that's widely considered to be controversial and racist. The majority of established encylopedias and even other wikipedia articles do not mention the following: "indigenous (non-Aryan) people"; it is widely considered to be racist to think such things. This is often brought up by Pakistanis in the "India-Pakistan" conflict as a way of alienating South Indians. Megawave111 (talk) 16:18, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

That does not deal with the reasons for your blocks. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 16:25, 27 August 2016 (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.

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Megawave111 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #16422 was submitted on Aug 26, 2016 16:40:00. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 16:40, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

August 2016

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. 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 ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 15:18, 27 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]