User talk:Xpardeep

Welcome![edit]

Hi Xpardeep! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing!

Copyright violations[edit]

One of your recent edits 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. Canterbury Tail talk 17:04, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of discretionary sanctions[edit]

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.

—SpacemanSpiff 16:18, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

August 2021[edit]

Please do not restore disputed material into a WP:BLP without finding WP:CONSENSUS on the talk page first, per WP:BLPRESTORE, WP:ONUS. Usedtobecool ☎️ 05:09, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You did a similar thing at the Ror article, reverting to a dreadful version that breaks many of our policies etc, much of which was already outlined on the talk page. You are heading towards a block or topic ban. - Sitush (talk) 06:07, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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 Surender Kumar, you may be blocked from editing. Please stop creating WP:BLP violations: caste requires self-identification in BLPs – see here for details. Also, don't add caste claims based on fake refs, as you did with this edit: the cited source doesn't even mention Ror anywhere. NitinMlk (talk) 08:42, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Had you read my refrences

Do you read punab kesri news? Xpardeep (talk) 09:02, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know hindi languages? There evrything is written cleared. In surender kumar you can read his parents name his villages name in refrences. It is in english. You can read full content Xpardeep (talk) 09:04, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Did you read WP:BLPRESTORE, WP:ONUS? I have and I am pretty sure they don't say you can ignore everyone and continue edit-warring if you include a reference. Usedtobecool ☎️ 09:09, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You removed thus line. It is one of the 36 main Jātis in Haryana.[3][4][5 Had you read the refrenced mentioned? Or i need to send screenshot or are you not interested in reading refrences? Xpardeep (talk) 09:06, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sending u one of the link which you need to read Xpardeep (talk) 09:07, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Before removing content please read the refrences first. If there is wrong please let me know before removing content. Xpardeep (talk) 09:10, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Ror. Please stop introducing BLP violations as well as misrepresented and poorly sourced content, as you just did at Ror article. If you have any issue then please discuss it as Talk:Ror. NitinMlk (talk) 09:10, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fuck off you and your website go to hell Xpardeep (talk) 09:13, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Can you lockdown the content so that no further edit Xpardeep (talk) 09:14, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

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 ~~~~}}. Bishonen | tålk 09:50, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently caste promotion, which is forbidden, is your only interest on Wikipedia, and this edit is inexcusable. Bishonen | tålk 09:51, 10 August 2021 (UTC).[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

You removed this line without any reason. It is one of the 36 main Jātis in Haryana.[3][4][5 Had you read the refrenced mentioned? Or i need to send screenshot or are you not interested in reading refrences?

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 13:04, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vijender_Singh There you can read jat caste word in early life section. You have the only issue with ror caste and yoy are only enemy of ror caste. Why you did not remove caste related word from other jat pages. You just target the ror pages and blocking over account. Xpardeep (talk) 06:38, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vijender_Singh There you can read jat caste word in early life section. You have the only issue with ror caste and you are only enemy of ror caste. Why you did not remove caste related word from other jat pages. You just target the ror pages and blocking our account.

Decline reason:

Unblock request does not address the reason for the block. Just a rant against another user. If you continue to make unblock requests that do not address the reason for your block, you will be blocked from editing your talk page in order to avoid wasting other's time. I suggest you try again, if you have a genuine reason that your block should be overturned, specifically addressing the reason for your block and not the actions of other users. Canterbury Tail talk 11:42, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Do you have any answer of my question? Xpardeep (talk) 11:46, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think you should remove edit option feom your website to edit the page. For some people you keep the castism or keep their content and for some people page you remove the content related to caste. All have the solid refrences also. Xpardeep (talk) 11:47, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is not fair amd makes people angry. Xpardeep (talk) 11:48, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Have you read the text above in this section and all the Wikipedia policies and guidelines that you have been pointed to? Do you actually understand the reason for your block? Canterbury Tail talk 11:49, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If its your website and you want to keep the content what you like you also support castisum and your account should also be ban because for 1 caste you remove the valid content and for other caste you keep the content. You are very smart. Xpardeep (talk) 11:50, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you not replying i need solution of these points. Otherwise you are equal responsible for partialty and God is also here if you think you are owner of this website then one day God will alos take decision on you for your wrong doing things. Thanks for your time bye if you do not want to reply do not want to all things fine. Xpardeep (talk) 11:52, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently caste promotion, which is forbidden, is your only interest on Wikipedia, and this edit is inexcusable. Bishonen | tålk 09:51, 10 August 2021 (UTC). Xpardeep (talk) 11:54, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Above was rhe reason you reply some days before for blocking Xpardeep (talk) 11:54, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please let me know whats the reason of block? If it is not above line? Xpardeep (talk) 11:59, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

do you have some time to talk with me? Please let me know the reason of block and lets discuss on it.

Decline reason:

You were warned multiple times by multiple editors regarding your disruptive editing -- copyright violations, BLP violations, caste promition etc. That you can't understand that and keep asking the same question indicates that you don't understand or are unwilling to follow the policies of this encyclopaedia. If you continue these kind of unblock requests then your ability to edit this talk page will also be revoked. —SpacemanSpiff 12:24, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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.

I will take care about this and will update only important lines. Please unblock me Xpardeep (talk) 13:19, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as it's not being used for any meaningful unblock requests. Also, you have been evading your block with IPs. Should you wish to submit a meaningful unblock request that addresses the problems with your editing, you can do so by following the process at WP:UTRS. —SpacemanSpiff 13:55, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]