Urdureporterchina

November 2020

Hello, I'm Tayi Arajakate. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 06:42, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

But why truth is truth Urdureporterchina (talk) 06:46, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. SUN EYE 1 07:54, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

SUN EYE 1 07:59, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

You Urdureporterchina (talk) 08:24, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to List of Hindu deities, you may be blocked from editing. Materialscientist (talk) 10:20, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you blank out or remove content from Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Diwali. Donner60 (talk) 03:54, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

You are deleting sourced content, which I have checked, which reports that Pakistan has added Diwali as a holiday without giving any reason, much less citing a reliable, verifiable, neutral, third party source showing this has been repealed. Donner60 (talk) 04:07, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did at Guruvayur Temple. AngryHarpy‍^talk 06:41, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

This is your only warning; if you remove or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia again, as you did at Guruvayur Temple, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. ----Rdp060707 (Your questions?/My fight against the devil) 06:46, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 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 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 ~~~~}}.  EvergreenFir (talk) 06:48, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I had no intention to create vandilism.I have relieble sources and proofs Urdureporterchina (talk) 06:49, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Decline reason:

You repeatedly removed content, despite being warned not to. You have failed to address this, therefore I see no reason to unblock you. — O Still Small Voice of Clam 08:07, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

---

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.

But I removed wrong content only Urdureporterchina (talk) 11:18, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Guruvayur Temple—because it 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. Materialscientist (talk) 17:32, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

But I was right Urdureporterchina (talk) 05:43, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I had no intention to create vandilism.I have relieble sources and proofs. Urdureporterchina (talk) 10:19, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Decline reason:

You removed sourced content. Also you didn't cite your sources. Both of which is disruptive, hence the block. PhilKnight (talk) 11:15, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

---

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-auto|...}} Urdureporterchina (talk) 10:20, 1 December 2020 (UTC)