User talk:Ntyhoney

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello Ntyhoney, and welcome to Wikipedia. All or some of your addition(s) to Sanoda Kotkasim has had to be removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material without permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributing to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from your sources to avoid copyright or plagiarism issues here.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. However, there are steps that must be taken to verify that license before you do. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are public domain or compatibly licensed), it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at the help desk before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you can, but please follow the steps in Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 21:07, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ahirwati

Please explain what it is you are doing with all of the various recent page moves etc involving, for example, Ahirwati, Ahirwati language and Ahirwati sa. I think you are making a bit of a mess of things, and you are certainly using unreliable sources. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 17:47, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And now you have nominated Ahirwati for speedy deletion. What on earth are you doing? Please, please start talking to people otherwise you may find yourself blocked for disruptive editing. - Sitush (talk) 14:22, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

July 2016

Hello, I'm Mahensingha. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Karauli, 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. Thank you. MahenSingha (Talk) 18:22, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rewari, Haryana

I removed your recent addition to this article. I see you copied the content from the article Rewari District, Haryana, but it had to be removed from there too, as the original source was this copyright web page from 1999. — Diannaa (talk) 23:01, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Are you ready for editing?

The

Adventure

Hi Ntyhoney!! You're invited: learn how to edit Wikipedia in under an hour. Hope to see you there!

Play The Wikipedia Adventure

This message was delivered by Sam Sailor ^Talk! 08:27, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Mewati language, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. Sam Sailor ^Talk! 08:27, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Anup Kumar

Hello Ntyhoney, I just wanted to inform you that I have reverted your move at Anup Kumar (kabaddi). Please note before moving a page you must read WP:MOVE and WP:TITLE or request move/rename at Wikipedia:Requested moves instead moving a page by yourself. Thank You – GSS (talk) 15:15, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Enough is enough. Practically every edit you have made has been problematic, a majority of them have been reverted and you are causing disruption left, right and centre. Since you are also showing no inclination to discuss the issues, please take note of the above information. - Sitush (talk) 15:35, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

July 2016

Your addition to Anup Kumar (kabaddi) has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Despite the earlier note about copyrights, you have uploaded a copyrighted image to Commons form here and then used it on the English Wikipedia. Don't do this. Sitush (talk) 15:46, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Rewari, Haryana 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 are 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) 15:50, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You need to provide reliable sources for information added to Wikipedia. See WP:V. - Sitush (talk) 15:51, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 36 hours for persistent disruptive editing. 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 ~~~~}}. NeilN ^{talk to me} 15:58, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Failure to discuss concerns about your edits and continuing to add unsourced material is not acceptable. Start using talk pages please. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 16:00, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 36 hours for continuing the same behavior after your prior block for disruptive editing ended. 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 ~~~~}}. —SpacemanSpiff 19:55, 19 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You've gotten back to the same behavior that led to your earlier block. Please note that if you continue this behavior after your block expires again then you're likely to be blocked indefinitely. —SpacemanSpiff 19:56, 19 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I noticed that you may have recently made edits to Anup Kumar (kabaddi) while logged out. Making edits while logged out reveals your IP address, which may allow others to determine your location and identity. Wikipedia's policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow the use of more than one account or IP address per person. If this was not your intention, please remember to log in when editing.

You have also evaded at Yadav, Ahir clans etc and you have done so using various IP addresses. Your block will be extended if you persist in this behaviour. Sitush (talk) 16:30, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As you are continuing this behavior and evading your block, I have extended it by a week. If this behavior continues any further then you will be indefinitely blocked. —SpacemanSpiff 17:47, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Khanpur Dagran

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing inappropriate pages, such as Khanpur Dagran, is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. wyskoj^talk 06:35, 13 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) 21:00, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Ntyhoney. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Rao Vihar

The article Rao Vihar has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Does not meet WP:GNG. Created by banned account.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 23:20, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]