Up-16

February 2017

Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I noticed that you made a change to an article, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 05:03, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Please see WP:RS, if you haven't already. Blogs such as devbhumiuttaranchal.com are not acceptable sources. utcursch | talk 12:14, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

February 2017

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Bisht has been reverted.
Your edit here to Bisht was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links in references which are discouraged per our reliable sources guideline. The reference(s) you added or changed (http://research.omicsgroup.org/index.php/Bisht) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 15:54, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Up-16, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Up-16! 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 AmaryllisGardener (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:06, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Citations

Once again, please read WP:RS. Geni.com is not a reliable source -- it is an open wiki and mirrors Wikipedia content. Same goes for merapahadforum.com -- forum posts are not acceptable sources. Finally, the ancestry.com link added by you does not support the content you're adding. utcursch | talk 16:57, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Please stop adding fake references, as you did here: ancestry.com and sunday-guardian.com do not support the content you are adding. Answers.com mirrors Wikipedia content and is not an acceptable source. utcursch | talk 06:58, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Please note - in addition to its mirrors, Wikipedia is not a reliable source, so cannot be used as a reference for anything. - Arjayay (talk) 10:48, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

This may be related.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:50, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

3RR

Your recent editing history at Bisht shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. - Arjayay (talk) 10:54, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

March 2017

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Bisht, without citing a reliable source using an inline citation that clearly supports the material. The burden is on the person wishing to keep in the material to meet these requirements, as a necessary (but not always sufficient) condition. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. I checked your reference you provided and it contains no evidence in support of your edits. You should also review the Neutral Point of View policy as it seems like this may have some relevance to your edits. Operator873 (talk) 06:02, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

August 2017

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Bisht. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. utcursch | talk 14:33, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Bisht. - Arjayay (talk) 17:42, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Bisht, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. - Arjayay (talk) 11:17, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

September 2017

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 Bisht. - Arjayay (talk) 15:33, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for long term disruptive editing around Bisht and unable to edit collaboratively.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  —SpacemanSpiff 23:21, 24 September 2017 (UTC)