Hello, I'm MB. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Belgundi, 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. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Please do not add information to article without citing a reliable sourced. See WP:REFB.MB01:12, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Belgaum. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Belgaum. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.Do not WP:POVPUSH and edit war. You are again adding content based on an unreliable source 'aboutbelgaum' as well as unsourced content. Second you are falsifying data on census changing Replacing the numbers of Kannada speakers with Marathi speakers. Discuss per WP:BRD in the talk page for WP:CONSENSUS.Fylindfotberserk (talk) 13:40, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello More eminence! Your additions to Belgaum have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.
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. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
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 must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.
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) 20:27, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
hello the image which was uplode at reacent is not a cpoywrite one and is cliked by my self. Please verify your thoughts and then tell it to others More eminence (talk) 11:32, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, More eminence. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:
avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.
You have been blockedindefinitely from editing for disruptive editing. Look, More eminence, your talk page is littered with so many warnings, to which you yet to respond substantively. I think that there's almost certainly a language gap, but this is the English Wikipedia, so sufficient command of the English language is required as a threshold to competence and communication (problems made all the more acute when contributing contested items to contested topics). That means that, after all of these multiple multiple warnings, you taking it upon yourself to closely review pertinent policies and guidelines was absolutely necessary — but perhaps outside your ability (i.e. possible English language limitation) or even willingness. Your most recent edit, for example, is a comment which tells a user to Google something. Which is completely antithetical to the ethos of Wikipedia. You effectively reversed what was very much yourWP:BURDEN, and instead, had inappropriately made it the burden of the user contesting the change (!). As well, as a practice, it's also intellectually lazy and, ultimately, just plain weird to, essentially, be saying to someone: 'go find sources about →my← assertion.' And, again, that isolated example—which I wouldn't focus too much on if I were you, as I picked it somewhat at random—is merely your most recent edit. So, unfortunately, with many other repeated problems, I find you highly likely to continue editing disruptively, unless compelled to stop. I'm sorry to say, but you have proven to simply be WP:NOTCOMPATIBLE at this time.
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_C23:07, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
