User talk:Manjeet Pandey1925

December 2016

Hello, I'm CAPTAIN RAJU. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Chandra Shekhar Azad have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. CAPTAIN RAJU ^(✉) 17:16, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 23:29, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

January 2017

Hello, I'm JudgeRM. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Crime in India, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. JudgeRM (talk to me) 20:11, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to List of Indian rail incidents have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Materialscientist (talk) 10:08, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Manjeet Pandey, please include sources when you add comments to articles. It is not sufficient to put a weblink in the edit summary. References should be inserted along with the material they support. Please see this advice on how to do this: Noyster (talk), 14:34, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edit to Crime in India

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Crime in India, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed 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! Josvan Talk 07:48, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

January 2017

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Crime in India. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. : Noyster (talk), 12:24, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edits to Chandra Shekhar Azad

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Chandra Shekhar Azad, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed 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! Materialscientist (talk) 09:35, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

February 2017

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Feroze Gandhi, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 11:53, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Chandra Shekhar Azad. It is important that you learn to edit Wikipedia and discuss your questions with editors before insisting on having it your way. Chris Troutman (talk) 12:18, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for persistently making disruptive edits. 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 request an unblock 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 12:20, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Chandra Shekhar Azad 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 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) 09:14, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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 that 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.

- Sitush (talk) 09:15, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

February 2017

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for persistently making disruptive edits. 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 request an unblock 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 10:56, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orginal research

Hi, Manjeet!

This paragraph looked like it was Wikipedia:Original research as no source seemed to be attached. I found there was a source mentioned in the edit summary. I went ahead and wrote a new section discussing solely what is in the source.

Remember that you cannot use "synthesis" (combining two or more sources or using a source to make a conclusion not stated in the source). See the Original research page for more information.

@Noyster: I notice the revert war in the edit summary. Turns out Manjeet was attaching his source in the edit summary, not the article body. WhisperToMe (talk) 13:09, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am aware of this WhisperToMe, which is why I had previously advised this editor It is not sufficient to put a weblink in the edit summary. (see above, 23 January). Readers cannot be expected to go through page histories to find links to sources supporting article content. Still, I'm happy that you improved the article: Noyster (talk), 00:30, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

February 2017

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did at Azad Kashmir, you may be blocked from editing. Kautilya3 (talk) 08:44, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ARBIPA sanctions reminder

Hello Manjeet, I would like to remind you that all Kashmir-related articles are covered under the ARBIPA sanctions, of which you have been notified above. If I see again the kind of disruptive edits you have made today, I will definitely ask for sanctions to be applied to you. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 08:49, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]