User talk:Induzcreed

Please refrain from repeatedly undoing other people's edits, as you are doing in Kochi. It appears you may be engaged in an edit war. The three-revert rule (3RR) prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, please discuss disputed changes on the talk page. Thank you. DileepKS69 (talk) 11:19, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome[edit]

Welcome!

Hello, Induzcreed, 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
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion 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 {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! BINOY ^Talk 11:07, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop reverting other people's edits, as you are doing in Kochi. You are in danger of violating the three-revert rule. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. If you revert again, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia without further notice. Please discuss any disputed changes on the talk page. Thank you. DileepKS69 (talk) 07:44, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop reverting other people's edits, as you are doing in Cochin International Airport. You are in danger of violating the three-revert rule. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. If you revert again, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia without further notice. Please discuss any disputed changes on the talk page. Thank you.--Arunvarmaother (talk) 07:26, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It seems you have a personal interest in attempt to distort or put Kochi related pages in negative light, which you have intensely tried in Kochi page. See Mr. Induzcreed, If you have any doubts, you can highlight and put it in talk page, discuss with other forumers and then work on, which is the normal convention, rather than deciding things by yourself, which result in reverting and possible danger in block list. My advice, pls talk your concerns in TALK PAGE and we can sort things there. You cannot expect references to put in each word, as it can enlarge the page to beyond normal level. I will see to some of your major concerns will be addressed as the page is on process of a FA Review. But frequent reverts, not only spoil that possibility (may be your idea is that), but in that process will result in your blocking. So work for betterment on information sharing, rather than personal interests. Come to talk page and lets hear where you have concerns and what can be done.--Arunvarmaother (talk) 07:51, 4 November 2010 (UTC) Show one instance I deleted or edited as you mentioned.Everybody know you are here to fancify this page by writing whatever you think.[reply]

One Page you are denying to accept some reference from a particular source and accepting as per your thinking in another.
You are quoting references from public forums and blogs and from private websites,which are NOT accepted as AUTHENTICATED VERIFIABLE REFERENCES in Wikipedia.
You are quoting outdated statistics(here say almost 4 years old) to prove your statements,which is not accepted.If you can provide ANY similar statistics.NOT different from the old one,then no issues.
You are adding some details which are no works under process,but in proposals.Such proposals shall be supported by valid references,preferably recent ones.
I still stick to the facts,as such if you can prove your statements then who have issue?Me not.
Last but not the least,please remember this is an Encyclopedia which so many are referring to,not a personal blog to express to appraise a single individual more than enough(this can be seen in this page) or input the ideas of an individual as he thinks his own way

So better put solid citations wherever necessary and delete the remaining.Those can be added later once the references get.Also,delete the proposals and ideas.Those can also be put into once comes reality or nearing reality.Don't be adamant to so get all in one day. I know you are very very new to Wikipedia Editing..So be careful.No need to send or give warnings to individual editors of blocking as you cannot do the block unless you are the moderator/admin.If so it will endup your blocking itself.

Thanks --Induzcreed (talk) 08:30, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you put case by case details in the talk page which is more appropriate as page is not owned by me, but the entire wiki-world and there can be so many who can answer case by case queries of yours. By making a private message to me, it makes no use as I donot alone have any responsibility to answer your query.

Secondly. let me answer a few details of yours

Pls make it clear what I accept in one page and deny in other? You can fire in dark. Pls clarify excatly.

Blogs, Forums, websites etc are not mentioned as unacceptable source by Wikipedia. Can you please point out which clause of Wikipedia policy denies blog posts or websites. Some websites has been blocked or blacklisted by Wikipedia due to reported case of unstable information. Other than those, all other sources are valid, unless specified

All informations are not provided by me alone. Many are provided by others, which are valid. You can challenge an information, only if you find updated information contradicts existing. If you find any stats mentioned in the page is wrong as new information is out, you can challenge and remove. Here you haven't proved any, rather deleted existing stats and asking for new? How do you know whether new stats are there or not, without pointing out?

There is no case of me thinking or not. Most of the information have solid information and if any information contradicts reality, you can point it out and remove. For example, in scheduled airlines list, old information stated that Jet Airways flies to Kuwait and Bahrain which was challenged by other member with evidences and removed. No one added it. I myself removed more than a dozen of wrong or imaginery flights mentioned there because I pointed out with relevant information. You haven't done any, rather commanding us to find out, as if you own the web page..... Unless you donot have relevant information that challenges existing information, its not valid to put here.

I too understand, that you are very new to the wikipedia and have ventured into wikipedia, only to distort review process of Kochi and related pages to put in wrong light, which is a negative trend. You haven't made any significant contributions with relevant informations till now, hence you donot have any authority to warn or command any other fellow wikipedias

As per Wikipedia's editing policy, a member with more than 500 edits and 6 months existence, is a recognized fellow wikipedian and hence I have power to recommend you to block you, if you continue with negative intentions of distorting information, without valid informations

And finally, pls talk case by case issues in talk page of Cochin Airport, not me privately and lets see what all fellow wikipedians has to say and challenge. This is not me vs you kind of issue. I donot own this page

And please be moderate in dealing, rather than turning yourself as a vandalizer. --Arunvarmaother (talk) 09:47, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Double standards[edit]

Mr. Induzcreed. I haven't forgotten the way you fought against the references made on the Kochi page. You have accused me of bias, and trying to hype the city.

NOW, you are doing edit war on the TVM page. Can you substantiate your actions on the talk page there?

DileepKS(talk) 00:58, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to TALK on Talk:Kochi[edit]

Reply to the following statement "Are you 'SURE' that the allegations made above are baseless?Why because, you challenged about such one about another forum (forgot its name) somewhere in Wiki recently.There also it seems no proofs were produced;I think.

Sorry Induzcreed, I am not sure I understand what you are trying to say here (see above). Please come again and be more specific. Also, let us talk on our TALK pages and not on the Kochi page. A lot of people there might not be interested in these one-one discussions. Before I leave, let me assure you and whoever else that I do not practice sock or meat puppetry as alleged and as always mentioned, let the admins take it up. :) MountainWhiskey - talk 09:10, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Infopark, Kochi Talk page[edit]

Hi Induz - I am disappointed to see that you have alleged that I am threatening IP users. I wish you would scroll up the page and see how many personal attacks (totally unwarranted) were made by the IP user. It was in this regard that I told him that his IP could be used to trace him if his attacks went beyond the limits. - MountainWhiskey - talk 08:53, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Invite to WikiConference India 2011[edit]

Hi Induzcreed,

The First WikiConference India is being organized in Mumbai and will take place on 18-20 November 2011.
You can see our Official website, the Facebook event and our Scholarship form.

But the activities start now with the 100 day long WikiOutreach.

As you are part of WikiProject India community we invite you to be there for conference and share your experience. Thank you for your contributions.

We look forward to see you at Mumbai on 18-20 November 2011

May 2012[edit]

Your addition to Technopark, Trivandrum has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Material copied from http://natana.in/ GabrielF (talk) 03:06, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:25, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]