User talk:Gauravsaral

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Gauravsaral, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Dabangg. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing 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 for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! RoCo^(talk) 06:05, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

December 2017[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Zakir Naik, but we cannot accept original research. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. Chris Troutman (talk) 05:54, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Popular Front of India. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Serols (talk) 16:42, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Discretionary sanctions alert[edit]

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Doug Weller talk 17:39, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you adding "extremist and miliant" to Islamic groups and removing it from Indian groups[edit]

With this edit you added "extremist and militant" to an Islamic group with an edit summary "adding subject to lead for better defining the content" while with this edit you removed the same phrase from an Indian group saying"The controversies involving BD are covered in the article. No need to try to make a statement in the lead". More edits like this and you will probably be topic banned from the subject. Doug Weller talk 17:43, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please see here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Chris_troutman, I am trying to make a point that there should be a standard and neutral POV for wiki articles. Indian Pages are generally written with a very negative POV, while pages like Tipu Sultan are white washed without any data

Also thanks for reaching out Dough Weller, I hope we can reach a point where there are same standards for pages irrespective of the community associated with them. You can clearly see the same admin having different approach in Tipu Sultan and in Bajrang Dal

You'd better read WP:POINT. Doug Weller talk 19:07, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller: can you please take a look at this page [Bajrang Dal], very hard to keep cool when whole wiki admin community is biased against a religion

December 2017[edit]

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Tipu Sultan. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Doug Weller talk 17:45, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please see here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Chris_troutman, I am trying to make a point that there should be a standard and neutral POV for wiki articles. Indian Pages are generally written with a very negative POV, while pages like Tipu Sultan are white washed without any data

Also thanks for reaching out Dough Weller, I hope we can reach a point where there are same standards for pages irrespective of the community associated with them. You can clearly see the same admin having different approach in Tipu Sultan and in Bajrang Dal

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. 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.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

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; 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. Vanamonde (talk) 18:29, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Re your comment on WT:IN[edit]

Hi. Regarding your comment *Comment: It should not be Gauravsarai's it is GauravSaral's. do note that your username is Gauravsarai with a lower case s. Generally, on Wikipedia, you will be addressed by either your username or whatever name you choose to use in your signature. If you prefer to be addressed as GauravSarai, you should consider modifying your signature (click on "Preferences" on the top right of the page, then on "User profile" and modify the contents of the signature box). Best wishes. --regentspark (comment) 01:44, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

December 2017[edit]

Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Doug Weller talk 14:22, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you continue you are likely to be blocked from editing. Doug Weller talk 14:23, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry[edit]

This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing for sock puppetry per evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/DinduNuffinWong. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. If you believe that this block was in error, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. Bbb23 (talk) 18:29, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation[edit]

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Gauravsaral, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 16:15, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]