User talk:Phule lulu

September 2017

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Jaggi Vasudev has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

• ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
• For help, take a look at the introduction.
• The following is the log entry regarding this message: Jaggi Vasudev was changed by Facsix (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.860503 on 2017-09-04T16:11:37+00:00 .

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 16:11, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Facsix, and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your recent contributions, such as your edit to the page News7 Tamil, have removed content without an explanation. If you'd like to experiment with the wiki's syntax, please do so in the sandbox rather than in articles.

If you still have questions, there is a new contributors' help page, or you can place {{helpme}} on your talk page along with a question and someone will be along to answer it shortly. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and how to develop articles
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• Article wizard for creating new articles
• Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing Wikipedia! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! Ifnord (talk) 16:56, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the information on wiki guidelines. It looks like my edit was eventually restored the same day, and the same was justified on your Talk page by a different user, to which you responded, again on same day, that "Then I owe Facsix an appology." Phule lulu (talk) 06:35, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some baklava for you!

Hi there! I'm new on Wikipedia and would like to continue working on this project. I made small changes in the article - Thirumal, a while ago; would like to carry on the work. Could you please guide me on the same. Thank-you. Kartik301994 (talk) 08:28, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

October 2020

Your edit to Shambuka has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. Wareon (talk) 03:48, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Discretionary sanctions alert for India, Pakistan and Afghanistan

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.

Unreliable sources and POV

Read WP:SPS and WP:RS. Just because other versions have mimicked the interpolation of Sambhuka, doesn't means it becomes authentic. It is still interpolation. Wareon (talk) 03:52, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can you be specific on which of the many academic sources you removed in one go on Shambuka wiki-page so as to propagate your view, are not authentic, and on what basis you arrived at each of such conclusions? Phule lulu (talk) 19:17, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

October 2020

Please stop your disruptive editing.

• 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 noticeboards.
• 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, as you did at Shambuka, you may be blocked from editing. Wareon (talk) 05:25, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain yourself on vandalism you did on Shambuka wiki-page and how you found restoration of page to be 'disruptive editing'. Provide facts with supporting evidences instead of your own assumptions, rather than threatening other editors with 'blocking'. Also provide reason for removing each of the sources on the wiki page.

Phule lulu (talk) 19:23, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reported for disruptive editing

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Wareon (talk) 02:37, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wow! This seems to be an rivalry between wareon and this guy Weeabo-kun2198 (talk) 18:27, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for restoring shambuka didn't knew waeron could be that naughty gg

Thanks for restoring shambuka didn't knew Weeabo-kun2198 (talk) 18:25, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

September 2023

Your recent editing history 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; read about 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 05:09, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The account's current status: "This account has been blocked indefinitely because its owner is suspected of abusively using multiple accounts."

Not surprised to hear this, after seeing the completely unnecessary, threatening and passive aggressive tone, used by the account on Talk pages of editors with differing views, like the comment here. Phule lulu (talk) 06:04, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

General sanctions alert

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 South Asian social groups. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has authorised uninvolved administrators to impose contentious topics restrictions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, expected standards of behaviour, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic. For additional information, please see the guidance on these sanctions. 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.

Ratnahastin (talk) 07:37, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you like doing copy-paste of random verbiage on Wiki Editor's talk pages. Let me know when you have added context for what the random verbiage is about and why you find it meaningful to leave on Talk Page. Phule lulu (talk) 05:40, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Ratnahastin (talk) 08:02, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you like doing copy-paste of random verbiage on Wiki Editor's talk pages. Let me know when you have added context for what the random verbiage is about and why you find it meaningful to leave on Talk Page. Phule lulu (talk) 05:40, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above notice was left because you are editing articles related to India. You need to be extra careful in the areas that are covered by WP:AC/DS. Ratnahastin (talk) 06:17, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Do you generally do this for every editor who changes articles concerning India? If you don't do this for every editor, can you help me understand what made you conclude that these notices are warranted on the Talk page i.e. can you connect it back to any specific Edit I made which led you to conclude the notice was necessary.

And you left two notices less than an hour apart. Do they fall under same wiki rule or different. If they are the same, what made you go with two different notices?

Thanks again. Phule lulu (talk) 06:27, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Any edit you made to India, Pakistan, Afghanistan topic area, would be covered by ARBIPA.

First one was a general notice while second one was specifically about India, Pakistan and Afghanistan. Ratnahastin (talk) 06:41, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Will you be answering my other questions also: That whether you do this for every editor concerning India or if not, which edit of mine made you do this.

And did you go through my Talk page to see that a different editor has covered the same thing in their notice, in October 2020? Phule lulu (talk) 06:58, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Shambuka

A discussion about the lead sentence is on Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Shambuka. Request your inputs. Redtigerxyz ^Talk 09:30, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the heads up. I was about to add my comments, but then noticed it has been closed.

I don't fully follow, does it mean that 'Shambuka' wiki page will continue with the misinformation (with no adequate backing) that he is 'an interpolated character' despite evidence to the contrary, as observed in many of the Sanskrit texts from the Vedic times? Thank you. Phule lulu (talk) 05:57, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

January 2024

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Shambuka. 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:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. 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. Ratnahastin (talk) 08:19, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Shambuka

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Redtigerxyz ^Talk 08:57, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

January 2024

You have been blocked from editing from certain pages (Shambuka) for a period of 2 weeks for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  ~ ToBeFree (talk) 16:21, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]