User talk:Kalangot

September 2019

Hello, I'm Mgasparin. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the help desk. Thanks. Mgasparin (talk) 05:56, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, may I look into that

Ok checked. I have added kalari marma uzhichil of northern kalari called vadakkan kalari done at frog posture ( Thavalapanthy ). I have added that without removing old photo amd added description with reference.

Thank you

Kalangot, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Kalangot! 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 John from Idegon (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:05, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

October 2019

Your recent editing history at Panicker shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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 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 the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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 you 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. Praxidicae (talk) 11:57, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It was me who pinged moderator. Please make the page protected

No. I'm a moderator. Do not make unfounded accusations, and stop edit warring or you will be blocked. In addition, many of your edits suffer from lack of proper sourcing--please be mindful of WP:RS. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 03:30, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lol.Poor guy Outlander07 (talk) 18:08, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Kalangot, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits to the page Kozhikode district did not conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may have been removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations verified in reliable, reputable print or online sources or in other reliable media. Always provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask a question on your talk page. Again, welcome. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:33, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou.

Always happy to edit.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Thiyya (October 9)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Robert McClenon was:

The proposed article does not have sufficient content to require an article of its own, but it could be merged into the existing article at Ezhava. Since anyone can edit Wikipedia, you are welcome to add that information yourself. Thank you.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Please explain, with reliable sources, why Thiyya and Ezhava are or are not the same caste.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Thiyya and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Thiyya, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 20:42, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of regiments of the Indian Army, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Malabar (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 07:28, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Theeyar moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Theeyar, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. scope_creep^Talk 10:56, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Kalangot: I've moved it back to draft to enable you to clean. It was some nick. Try using this: [1] it is much easier. I'll do one for you from your article.scope_creep^Talk 10:58, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Theeyar moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Theeyar, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Jalen Folf (talk) 16:48, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:53, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Block

You have been blocked from editing for a period of one week for violating the 3 revert rule. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

El_C 02:20, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock 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).

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

Request reason:

I have understood the policies of Wikipedia and i promise here that i wont violate it in future. please unblock me

Decline reason:

Only one open unblock request at a time, please. I will leave your newest request below open. SQL ^{Query me!} 16:23, 30 December 2019 (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.

unblock discussion

Please modify your unblock request to clarify your understanding of the following.

In the event of a content dispute, editors are required to stop reverting, discuss, and seek consensus among editors on the relevant talk page. If discussions reach an impasse, editors can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution.

Points to ponder:

Edit warring is wrong even if one is right.

Any arguments in favor of one's preferred version should be made on the relevant talk page and not in an unblock appeal.

Calling attention to the faults of others is never a successful strategy; one must address one's own behavior.

To be unblocked, you must affirm an understanding of all of this, and what not to do, and what to do when in a content dispute. Please tell us, in your own words, what it all means. Thanks,-- Deep fried okra 15:37, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

hi ,

I understood that editing without debating in talk page is a violation. Into edit ar is a violation Adding things without refernce is aviolation Vandalism on a page is a violation

Do not unblock this account. Outlander07 (talk) 18:05, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]