User talk:Swamydsp90

Welcome!

Hello, Swamydsp90, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Contributing to Wikipedia
The Wikipedia Adventure (a fun game-like tour to help get you oriented within Wikipedia)
Wikipedia Teahouse (a user-friendly help forum)
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! We're so glad you're here! Jim1138 (talk) 16:04, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, but we cannot accept original research. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, and ideas—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 21:26, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

January 2015

Hello, I'm Jim1138. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Durvasa 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. Jim1138 (talk) 05:15, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please cite sources

See wp:verifiablity as to why significant edits need to wp:cite a wp:reliable source. You can cite books and journals as well if they are reliable. Using your own knowledge is considered wp:original research and should be avoided. Please avoid editing in this way without adding a citation with your edit. Please remember to use an wp:edit summary so that others can understand your reasoning. Thank you Jim1138 (talk) 16:04, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

October 2015

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from one or more pages (See diff here: link) into another page. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. The content is copied from http://www.mkgandhi.org/Selected%20Letters/Selected%20Letters1/letter%202.htm and the other sources cited in the addition. Thank you. Kapil.xerox (talk) 04:19, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

August 2016

Hello, I'm Marianna251. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Krishna 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. Thanks. Marianna251TALK 09:18, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

October 2016

Please stop making disruptive edits.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. I notice 5 instances of being warned to stop removing content without due explanation, adding original research, and discussing undue additions on the talk page. With such a history, I have been resorted to using a level 3 warning. Please consider this with due weight. Tardispower (talk) 20:34, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to clarify the reason for putting this warning on here. This is a notice for Swamydsp90 to please use this talk page next time the user feels compelled to remove a balanced commentary. As I explained above, respecting WP:UNDUE is important therefore I've had to remove the commentary in the lead section that the user included. It did not include a balanced statement of facts from Gandhi's perspective violating WP:NPOV, and it was given undue weight in the first place to even be included on the Swaminarayan page.

Additionally, the user completely ignored the additions that included peer-reviewed scholarly work, and restored his own original inclusion which once again violated WP:NPOV. Please refrain from doing this. I have also had to remove the Dayanand Saraswati commentary since the text cited, and even the claims cited do not satisfy WP:RS and seem to fall into the WP:FRNG. Swamydsp90 is asked to engage in a proper discussion here on the talk page before future inclusions and edits. The user has been issued a warning on their talk page, which holds 4 previous warning by various editors over the last year who have noticed a similar behavior. Tardispower (talk) 02:04, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

October 2016

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by inserting unpublished information or your personal analysis into an article. With regards to the Akshardham (New Jersey) article, don’t use Reddit as a source - it isn’t allowed. Looking through your edit history, it clearly isn’t the first time you’ve done it. You’ve been given numerous warnings about your edits. I’m giving you a level 4 warning. Actionjackson09 (talk) 11:13, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]