User talk:Pranayjyothikumar

Welcome!

Hello, Pranayjyothikumar, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!--Biografer (talk) 19:39, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Arjayay. I noticed that you recently removed content from Andhra Pradesh without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. - Arjayay (talk) 08:43, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Pranayjyothikumar, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits to the page Andhra Pradesh have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and has been or will be removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or in other media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles. Additionally, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask a question on your talk page. Again, welcome. - Arjayay (talk) 08:43, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Telangana[edit]

Hello! I reverted your edits at Telangana for several reasons. Wikisource is not necessarily considered a reliable source, even for primary source material; but it does offer links to originals for verification of content. In any event, even reliably published primary sources should be used very cautiously, if at all. Articles should also be built from reliable secondary sources instead, and be free of editorial opinion and interpretation. The passage you added was also rather confusing, in meaning and grammar. Please don't revert this most recent removal again; you seem to have done so once already. ~~at least two previous occasions.~~ Take the matter to the talk page of the article, and discuss it there. Thank you. Haploidavey (talk) 09:29, 15 November 2017 (UTC)text b[reply]

Sorry, just one more thing. The lead of any article is supposed to be a summary of the sourced content in sections below it. See WP:LEAD and WP:UNDUE. A section comprising just a sentence or two in the main article probably does not justify a disproportionately long summary in the lead. Thanks for reading this. Haploidavey (talk) 11:08, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello it is just not text mentioned in wiki source original written letter to Indian national congress by hyderabad CM letter images uploaded in it u can go through it now and check this https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Hyderabad_CM_Burgula_Views_about_merger and go to Sate reorganisatio committe original document clearly says they opposed the merger and recommended the state of telangana by disintegrating hyderabad state which comprises Telangana Marathwada and Karnataka regions this is state reorganisation commision original report please go through it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/States_Reorganisation_Commission commision clearly says here {{The Commission's report judged the arguments for and against the merger of the Telugu-majority Telangana region (of Hyderabad State) and the Andhra State (created in 1953). Para 369 to 389 of SRC deals with the merger of Telangana and Andhra to establish the Andhra Pradesh state (complete text of the recommendations is available on Wikisource). Para 386 of SRC says, "After taking all these factors into consideration we have come to the conclusions that it will be in the interests of Andhra as well as Telangana, if for the present, the Telangana area is to constitute into a separate State, which may be known as the Hyderabad State}} souce nd proofs are completely authentic

November 2017[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Telangana 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: Telangana was changed by Pranayjyothikumar (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.856923 on 2017-11-16T03:55:14+00:00 .

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 03:55, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Telangana‎, you may be blocked from editing. - Arjayay (talk) 09:33, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Arjayay stop ur andhrites racism on telangana who r u to control on our state history no personal opinions written by me here those are expressed by sate reorganisation commission in theier report and hyderabad chief minister in his letter written to indian national congress original scanned letter images is uploaded in the source page. I wrote the exact happend history with orginal proofs nd sources are authentic please go through these proofs https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Hyderabad_CM_Burgula_Views_about_merger https://www.scribd.com/document/320379696/State-Reorganisation-Commisison-Report-of-1955-270614-pdf and im requesting to u again stop racism hating others and vandalising this is reaaly embarassing to our state if u continue these activities u will face next consequences

Comment on content, not editors. What "might the "next consequences" be? Read WP:THREATEN, please. There is no evidence on any talk page or in any edit summary that Arjayay has vandalised any article, or written any racist, nationalistic, or "hating" comments anywhere. The content you persist in adding is not acceptable, for legitimate reasons; those are outlined above, and in the various edit summaries by those who have reverted your changes. You should also read WP:EDITWAR; I'm about to revert your most recent addition of the same content to Telangana. Please don't restore it unless or until there's a WP:Consensus to do so. Haploidavey (talk) 12:06, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mr Haploidavey i am not attacking personally any 1 here arey yaar i am providing all the original proofs and souces about the content and his intentionally reverting my content which is original.. Most of telanganites are inaware of our own history from past 4 generations now we researched and found real history of our state telangna and proving original proofs and resouces here i am not writing my own analysis they are completely documented by government of india https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Hyderabad_CM_Burgula_Views_about_merger https://www.scribd.com/document/320379696/State-Reorganisation-Commisison-Report-of-1955-270614-pdf these are authentic and oiginal proofs and if u want to now about andhrites racism please go through about telangana state agitation in 1956 1969 1972 2009 2014 and i am restoring my content bacause i was actual history and finally can u please tell me what else proofs can i show u about my content rather than provided proofs here i will provide here.. and arjayay content about andhra pradesh is completely wrong andhra state is the first formed state after independence in india by carving out from Madras sate on 1st October 1953 later andhra struggeled for capital with the loss of madras city to tamil people later they decided to merge with telangana by disintigrating Hyderabad state to just get hyderabad city on november 1st 1956 to form andhra pradesh forcbly with out telangana peoples wish http://prannoyroy.strikingly.com/blog/vishalandra-goal-this-is-why-andhra-leaders-imposed-vishalandra-on-telangana this source gives u the original news paper cuts published saying about andhra state formation on oct 1 1953 and andhra leaders want hyderabad as capital by merging with telangana http://prannoyroy.strikingly.com/blog/telangana-people-are-deadly-against-vishalandra-in-1956 and this original letter source gives you that Hyderabad CM wrote a letter to congress high command that telangana people are completely opposing the merger with andhra state Cheif minister represents whole state not a single person in state and please i excuse me to revert my content because i have given you all the original and authentic sources

You have constructed your case, and your responses here, around a number of highly partisan primary source documents. That's fine on talk pages but in articles it counts as undue emphasis and original research. Wikipedia article content should be balanced, and summarise what's written in reliable, published, peer-reviewed secondary sources, not the partisan opinions of primary sources or Wikipedia editors. I'm not challenging the original material itself -- I'm sure it's authentic. Well-formed links to primary sources are fine, if they add verification to secondary source statements or opinions; but "truth" is irrelevant to Wikipedia. Secondary sources represent their own opinions about primary sources. Wikipedia editors might agree or disagree with those opinions. That doesn't matter to Wikipedia. Editors can hold whatever strong feelings and opinions they wish; but those opinions and feelings have no place in Wikipedia articles. If you'd just take the time to read all the blue-links I've provided here, you might grasp the issues involved. Haploidavey (talk) 14:07, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]