User talk:Rajshekhar Reddy Arya

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome![edit]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Kautilya3 (talk) 20:43, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reddy dynasty[edit]

Please make an effort to use post-1950 sources, which are based on modern scholarship. Colonial era history and sociology are not considered reliable. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:45, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Arya, you have paid no attention to my previous revert at Reddy dynasty, or my message above explaining the problem with it. If you continue making the same edit, without paying attention to the issue, I am afraid you will end up getting blocked. Please provide you response here, instead of WP:edit warring. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 09:56, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

April 2018[edit]

Information icon Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Reddy dynasty. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. Kautilya3 (talk) 09:49, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rajshekhar Reddy Arya, you are invited to the Teahouse![edit]

Teahouse logo

Hi Rajshekhar Reddy Arya! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like I JethroBT (talk).

Visit the Teahouse
We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:03, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Invitation[edit]

I love all varieties of tea, thank you very much. Rajshekhar Reddy Arya (talk) 18:06, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the "Tea House" is where you can go to ask questions and get answers from friendly senior editors.
Note that you can respond to posts, by adding them at the end of the section, like I am doing now. Please see HELP:TALK for help on how to write talk page posts. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:51, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ARBIPA sanctions alert[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 recently 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 any 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.

Kautilya3 (talk) 02:03, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

September 2018[edit]

Information icon Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, discussion pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments, as you did at Talk:Reddy dynasty, is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Even making spelling and grammatical corrections in others' comments is generally frowned upon, as it tends to irritate the users whose comments you are correcting. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Kautilya3 (talk) 23:16, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Healthy Media[edit]

Wikipedia is a healthy media and all people of the world depend on it for authentic information on diverse topics. This media is popular for instant info on diverse topics and the people love wikipedia for it's high standards . I request wikipedia not to encourage people of ill intentions to write what ever they like in talk section , this is a place for healthy discussion and view point but wrting biased view with fraud in mind and also the use of filthy language by rouges on talk page definitely hurts sentiments of people around the world , writing trash like fake history on Reddy dynasty talk page is the work of a rouge devil and wikipedia must definitely protect the readers rights also , so keeping this in mind I hope strong action is taken or atleast remove trash from talk page , people want healthy view points and not some rouge's manufactured trash points . As there are millions of fans of wikipedia world over I hope my request of removing trash from talk page and peoples concern in general is addressed well . Thank you. Rajshekhar Reddy Arya (talk) 01:00, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

October 2018[edit]

Please assume good faith in your dealings with other editors, which you did not do on Talk:Reddy dynasty. Assume that they are here to improve rather than harm Wikipedia. Also, see WP:RGW. ∯WBGconverse 07:48, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I have reverted you at Talk:Reddy dynasty. Referring to people as scum is not acceptable, nor is producing a long screed of opinion without any means of verifying it. Article talk pages are for discussion of improvements to the article in question, not for communal rants. Please note the information below.
The Wikipedia community has permitted administrators to impose discretionary sanctions on any editor who is active on any page about social groups, explicitly including caste associations and political parties, related to India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal. Discretionary sanctions can be used against an editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process. If you engage in inappropriate behavior in this area, you may be placed under sanctions, which can include blocks, a revert limitation, or a topic ban. The discussion leading to the imposition of these sanctions can be read here.

Please familiarise yourself with the information page at Wikipedia:General sanctions/South Asian social groups.

- Sitush (talk) 12:33, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Warning[edit]

This post of yours is even worse than the ones Sitush removed. Presumably WBG and Sitush didn't see it, because it happened to be affected by a bit of code, <!--, which made it invisible on the page. That was a bit of luck for you. If you express yourself in such terms again, anywhere on Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. Wikipedia is not a venue for promoting your caste, and we have policies against personal attacks. Bishonen | talk 15:14, 1 October 2018 (UTC).[reply]

Golla[edit]

Why are you resurrecting an 18-month old closed thread at the Golla (caste) article? Whether you think something is a "joke" or not, it is neither needed nor desirable. Perhaps worse, despite my previous note, you are making claims without a source. Just stop it, please: dredging up stuff like that just inflames caste rivalry etc and you have already been made aware that you can be sanctioned for it. - Sitush (talk) 10:19, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'am really happy to be a part of the wikipedia family, I promise to maintain high standards but readers too have a right to decency. In Reddy dynasty talk page view points like a)Is there something called Reddy dynasty and further objectionable comments like Reddy people of those days were balija naidus is highly discriminative and hurtful comment, this stuff is trash and it definitely shows that persons mind set, if such mean views are ok then the same can be applied to other castes also. b) In the same section comments like Fake history is also not desirable. What is fake history about Kondavidu Reddy kingdom ?. Such trash should find it's place in dustbin only.
And I don't think one should give reference for Ashoka the Emperor and that Chatrapathi Shivaji Raje was a Marath warrior!, similarly reference is not required about Kakatiya Prola Reddy 2nd and Recherla Rudra Reddy who built the famous Ramappa temple. I feel sincere view point is above all. Thank you. Rajshekhar Reddy Arya (talk) 11:48, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No, it is required.Do you expect any random people from the planet to be born-aware of the fact that you state, so assertively? If the answer is no, you need to cite a reliable source.∯WBGconverse 12:37, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You need to improve your talkpage practice[edit]

Arya, you need to sign your posts on talkpages. It seems you do know how to sign, since you do it occasionally, as here. But please do it every time. It makes discussions much easier to follow, so signing is an important courtesy to your fellow editors. Also, I urge you to read other people's signatures, especially their timestamps. It's quite pointless to reply to somebody who posted ten years ago! Or, as Sitush says above, to try to resurrect an 18-month old closed thread. Please focus on recent discussions, and on actual suggestions for changes to the article, with sources. I'm afraid you're just wasting your time with your current talkpage practice, so please take this advice to heart. Bishonen | talk 10:49, 2 October 2018 (UTC).[reply]

Hi, Rajshekhar, can you please acknowledge that you are seeing these messages? Communication is an important aspect of Wikipedia editing because it allows the collaboration which lies at its heart. - Sitush (talk) 17:43, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I'am very happy to be a part of the wikipedia family, thank you very much for your faith in me. Regards.Rajshekhar Reddy Arya (talk) 11:59, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
oh dear, did you actually read this -->> you need to sign your posts on talkpages --Adamstraw99 (talk) 18:27, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOTFORUM[edit]

Your essay on Talk:Kapu (caste) was reverted by RegentsPark, citing WP:NOTFORUM. It appears that you have reinstated it again. Can you explain? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:43, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The kapu or Telaga are too concerned about their status as shudra and have voiced their viewd on topics such as telagas are not bc , or kapus are not shudhras , on this particular topic they dragged Reddy also and wrote about them so I thought I should share my info too regarding the origin of Reddy with telagas/kapu guys only to clear their doubts.Rajshekhar Reddy Arya (talk) 15:21, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That is a very good example of what article talkpages are not for. Do you ever look at history pages to see why your posts or other edits are removed? There's a link to the history at the top of every page. The history of Talk:Kapu (caste), for example, is here. (Please follow the link and look at it.) It shows that you added a post for Kapus to read, that RegentsPark removed it with the comment WP:NOTFORUM, and that you put it back. That's not what you're supposed to do. If your post is removed, look in the history to see why that was. WP:FORUM is a guideline for how to use talkpages. It would do you good to read it, because you honestly still don't seem to have a clue how to use them. They're for suggesting improvements to the relevant article, in this case Kapu (caste). They're not in the least for telling Kapus something about Reddys.
You probably do your best, but if you can't grasp how to use Wikipedia, and how to edit articles and talkpages, then I'm afraid you're just making too much work for other people, and that will lead to your being blocked from editing. Please try to internalise the advice you've been given, because everybody's patience with you is fast running out. Bishonen | talk 16:05, 5 October 2018 (UTC).[reply]
Thanks for your kind advice , I promise to do my best and follow rules and regulations. I have a doubt regarding references from british era, you always say that it is not allowed then may I know why did you allow reference of Edgar Thurston in Kamma(caste) wiki page regarding origin of kammas from a fictitious character of Bhelti Reddi, Please clear my doubt so that it benefits me. Rajshekhar Reddy Arya (talk) 17:51, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It is not all about "rules and regulations". We do depend on common intelligence and expect that editors follow up on suggestions and answers given previously. You cannot keep on raising the same issues again and again. For instance, the Belti Reddi issue, that you raised on Talk:Reddy, has been answered. I don't see that you have understood the answer or checked the information and source that I mentioned there. Have you looked at the source? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:28, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You said this yesterday. You were replying to a post from 2015 and yet again not providing any support for your claims. I know that the preceding post was equally bad but certainly in your case you should now know better. - Sitush (talk) 09:28, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Caste lists[edit]

Hi, I reverted you at Kapu (caste) because your "spelling correction" made a mess of things and, worse, you were adding people to the list of notable Kapus without providing a reliable source. Please note that, in addition to the sourcing requirement, we also need the source to show that the person self-identifies as a member of the caste if they are still alive. This is to comply with our policy regarding biographies of living people. The information at User:Sitush/Common#Castelists is probably going to be helpful for you. - Sitush (talk) 04:13, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your kind advice. Can I consider wikipedia articles as source material ? Rajshekhar Reddy Arya (talk) 04:34, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If the person you want to add to a list has an article about themselves on Wikipedia, and if that article shows that they have self-identified as belonging to the caste in question, then, yes, you can. (Not otherwise.) In such a case, don't use a footnote, but simply add the name and link it to Wikipedia's article by putting double square brackets around it, like this: [[name]]. It's important that you write the name carefully and spell it exactly as it's spelled in the biographical article title, otherwise the link won't work. (If it doesn't turn blue, it hasn't worked.) Bishonen | talk 18:35, 18 October 2018 (UTC).[reply]

Thank you so much.- Rajshekhar Reddy Arya (talk) 03:37, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh. I did wonder last night. Takes ages for the penny to drop in my head. - Sitush (talk) 06:23, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I had added a few famous people to the notable people in Kapu page, I had also followed the instructions given by Bishonen on how to give a link to wikipedia page if an article exists about those persons; but the names from the list were deleted, may I know the reason please ?. Thank you.- Rajshekhar Reddy Arya (talk) 06:47, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The reason is simple, You are a sockpuppet and sockpuppet additions are usually reverted here... --Adamstraw99 (talk) 07:11, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It is a bit more complicated than that. They included a redlinked "article", Vemana doesn't even mention Kapu, let alone have a source verifying it, and so on. Will you please find another hobby: you're not improving the image of the Kapus, Musunuri Nayaks or, indeed, of contributors to this project from India. We are supposed to assume good faith but it becomes difficult when so many people from certain places/communities repeatedly disrupt the project. At the end of it all, you lose. - Sitush (talk) 07:20, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean sockpuppet ?, I'am a normal person and by myself straight forward. Reddy people are kapu so I had included four names who were self motivated people and achieved greatness in their respective fields and they definitely are an inspiration to others, I do not see any self gain in it but only to inspire others .-Rajshekhar Reddy Arya (talk) 09:21, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Q 1) I had added four dignified personalities namely Shri Neelam Sanjiva Reddy , Dr. YS Rajasekhara Reddy , Poet & writer C Narayana Reddy and Dr. Pratap C Reddy(Apollo hosp) to the list of Notable People in the article Kapu(caste), my addition is better than the person who had added the name of Vangaveeti Mohana Ranga Rao a known rowdy sheet MLA of congress party, whole state of Andhra Pradesh knows it that the person was a criminal MLA, the article itself speaks of rowdism !; may I know why the names added by me were removed and the name of rowdy MLA added by someone else was not removed ?, may be because this is a place for all!. And may I know why did you block me in a very unfair manner?. Q 2) I had also edited the article Kondapalli fort in which I had done some correction like, the fort is in Krishna district and was built by Reddy Kings of Kondavidu with reference from dept of archaeology and museums, Hyd. The article continues to show false statements such as ; the fort is in guntur district and that it was built by musunuri nayaks and that they ruled south India and built many forts in their dreams !. I do not understand how such falsehood can become a part of wikipedia articles and may I know why this article omits information on the rule of Reddy kings of Kondavidu at Kondapalli fort ?. Rajshekhar Reddy Arya (talk) 19:59, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Rajshekhar_Reddy_Arya&oldid=1048387385"