I have removed Category:India from your userpage, as it was causing your page to show up in the main India category for articles; article categories are not to be used for Userpages. Did you mean to use instead Category:Wikipedians in India ? MatthewVanitas (talk) 23:54, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi London at night! 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 peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Benzband (I'm a Teahouse host) Visit the Teahouse This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 15:58, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Did you see that JK is removing the source from article Kunchacko Boban. he is a fan of dileep he change source from kunchacko boban and he promoting dileep «»[1]«» Merenjith (talk • contribs) 08:07, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from abusing warning or blocking templates. Doing so is a violation of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please use the user warnings sandbox for any tests you may want to do, or take a look at our introduction page to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia. Thank you. JK (talk) 08:37, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User JK is removing the source from article Kunchacko Boban pls help by Reverting it back. Thank you.Merenjith (talk). 02:52, 31 March 2013‎ (UTC)[reply]

I have undone this edit you made to Neelakasham Pachakadal Chuvanna Bhoomi. Removing the AfD tag, which notifies users of the deletion discussion, is disruptive, because it hides the discussion away. Users can't participate if they don't know the discussion is ongoing. You're welcome to participate in the discussion, of course. —C.Fred (talk) 15:40, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Mammootty shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. —C.Fred (talk) 05:56, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for edit warring. 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 below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

Materialscientist (talk) 06:05, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]