User talk:Srijanx22

Hello and

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Editing tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Simplified Manual of Style

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:

• Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
• Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
• Take particular care while adding biographical material about a
  reliable sources
  .
• No
  abuse of multiple accounts
  .
• If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
• Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
• Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The

Hi there, re: this edit, as an FYI, the community isn't interested in IMDb user ratings. They can be manipulated and don't necessarily reflect reality. See

Hello, I'm Fylindfotberserk. I noticed that you recently removed content from Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh 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. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:06, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You are Welcome

Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:03, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You sir, for my new pet. Srijanx22 (talk) 17:36, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hahaha.. Regards. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 14:38, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

😃😊 Srijanx22 (talk) 21:56, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I would like to know the reason for this unexplained edit.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:18, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did at Kurukshetra War. Doug Weller talk 14:03, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Plz could you explain my mistake cuz as far as I know I didn't remove any template.I remove an unnecessary qoute and it's related citation. So it would be better to specifically tell me what is wrong with my edit. Srijanx22 (talk) 07:09, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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 shown interest in

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.

SUN EYE 1 11:59, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Violence against Christians in India, you may be blocked from editing. SUN EYE 1 12:00, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Billy West.

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Wars of the Diadochi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Antigenes (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:24, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors, which you did not do on Talk:Maratha invasions of Bengal. Thank you. RegentsPark (comment) 15:40, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@RegentsPark: I assume this is a misunderstanding. Have you looked into blatant misrepresentation of sources, edit warring, failure to BRD by other editor? Am I not even allowed to start a talk page discussion for his month long continued disruption? Srijanx22 (talk) 15:50, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Srijanx22. Alleging that someone is editing with a POV (as you repeatedly do here) is indicative that you are not assuming good faith. Stick to sources and dispassionate discussion and you won't have any problems. --RegentsPark (comment) 15:55, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't know that but I agree now. But then, even he is throwing "POV" charge onto others when he said that there are those who were "trying to push the Maratha POV".[1] Maybe you can warn him similarly? Srijanx22 (talk) 15:59, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

True. But they are not pointing at any specific user so it is merely a general statement and that's not the same thing. --RegentsPark (comment) 16:10, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We met at a bitter dispute spread over one talk, a handful of user talks and a couple of ANIs, not the best places to meet fellow editors. I regret my loss of cool, which I hope haven't damaged the possibility of you and I collaborating in future, on something. After all we are often interested in similar articles, and we all want to improve them to the best of our abilities. Maybe sometime we could have a beer together, or Y tea. It's better than beer, you know. Apologising again for all the badblood. Peace. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 02:36, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think we have a consensus. Since you were one of the diriving forces of the discussion... would you do the honors of making the consensus edit? Anyone protests and I stand by you.

By the way, what Y virtual tea would you prefer? I guess it's time to pour another cup to celebrate a successful discussion. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 01:46, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Aditya, I am glad we all were able to reach to a consensus through healthy discussions. I appreciate the honors of making the consensus edit, however I agree with the arguments made by @Peacemaker67 in [2]. We should have a final vote regarding this and close this matter of contention once and for all.😊 Srijanx22 (talk) 07:28, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a box of jalebi to go with baklava (though baklavas are the best). It was indeed sweet after so much deliberation. 😊 Aditya(talk • contribs) 08:38, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Diabetes alert 😬😬 Srijanx22 (talk) 10:31, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) . - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 11:39, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've restored to the version before your edit since substantial maintenance, archiving and cleanup has been done since the November 2019 version. Kindly do it manually instead of full revert to the old version. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 09:52, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Electoral College (India), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jammu and Kashmir.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:36, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In the B. R. Ambedkar article, you have been continuously deleting edits of many users without giving a proper reason and without consensus. "Puffery and flattering language" is not an acceptable reason. Removing wiki page links, spelling corrections, references / sources, content, categories, external links, templates, statues information, other correct information, etc., are not all "puffery and flattery languages". But, you have consistently deleted a large text. No text should be removed without the consensus of the wiki community. So do not delete it again. भारतभूषण प्रकाश नरंदेकर (talk) 18:26, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not use styles that are nonstandard, unusual, inappropriate or difficult to understand in articles, as you did in Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly. There is a Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. Thank you. JRDkg (talk) 14:05, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of governors of Bengal Presidency, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bengal Province.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:14, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pleae read

What wrong i have done?? Shraman1218 (talk) 22:57, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Western Command (India)

added links pointing to Corps of Engineers and 100th Regiment of Foot

Northern Command (India)

added a link pointing to 100th Regiment of Foot

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:53, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This has clearly become a notable storyline of the second wave. In fact, I think the article has been too positive and needs to include more criticism of the response in order to satisfy

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 shown interest in

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.

FDW777 (talk) 12:20, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see you received one above, but as it was over twelve months ago a new one is necessary for awareness. FDW777 (talk) 12:21, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement. FDW777 (talk) 10:40, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Srijanx22. Please see the question I've posed at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Aman.kumar.goel. You can respond in section "Comments by other users". Thanks. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 02:01, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(

WP:LEDECITE. I've restored Srijanx' edit. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 17:19, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

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 shown interest in Eastern Europe or the Balkans. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called

page-specific restrictions

, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{

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.

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

Sapedder (talk) 05:30, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Sapedder (talk) 03:47, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]