User talk:Gulsaid khan

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Cahk (talk) 21:58, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

Materialscientist (talk) 21:59, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article Baghal Rajput has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails

WP:G

. There is a state of this name, and at least one raja of the Puar or Panwar who was called Baghal, but otherwise there appear to be no reliable sources that discuss this alleged clan. I suspect it is just another Indian surname.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Sitush (talk) 10:08, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing. 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. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block.

• Hi, you really do have to get to grips with our policies. In particular, those relating to
  notability. Have you read the material at those links? Is there something that you do not understand there? Sitush (talk) 16:37, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply
  ]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Baghal Rajput is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Baghal Rajput until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Sitush (talk) 16:40, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You are still doing this all over the place, including in your third recreation of the Pothwari-Pahari people article. Enough is enough. Sitush (talk) 17:08, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sitush in the name of editing and patrolling you discourage genuine users of wikipedia to use as a platform to share publishable materials. thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gulsaid khan (talk • contribs)