Meow

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from one or more pages into Men's rights movement. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was copied, attribution is not required. — Diannaa (talk) 13:14, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot, Diannaa. I'll keep that in mind. :) Levixius (talk) 17:48, 18 May 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 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 the 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.

Doug Weller talk 14:52, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You need to be much more specific. Doug Weller talk 14:59, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I'll add some elaborations. LΞVIXIUS💬 15:32, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Levixius! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! — Newslinger talk 15:28, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot, Newslinger! LΞVIXIUS💬 18:18, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article CallMeCarson has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Ugbedeg (talk) 23:38, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It has been addressed in the talk page. LΞVIXIUS💬 23:54, 12 June 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 (a) GamerGate, (b) any gender-related dispute or controversy, (c) people associated with (a) or (b), all broadly construed. 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 the 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.

Woodroar (talk) 12:12, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article LeafyIsHere 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/LeafyIsHere until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. decltype (talk) 12:40, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Levixius! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

• The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
• The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
• The Teahouse new editor help space
• Wikipedia Help pages

-- 13:55, Sunday, August 23, 2020 (UTC)

Hello:

The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article 2022 Chuukese independence referendum has been completed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 20:48, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Depression, Suicidal tendencies and Jammu and Kashmir.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:42, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

One source (cnet) with nontrivial coverage is not enough for notability

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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 page 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. JBL (talk) 19:11, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Shittymorph 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/Shittymorph until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. Praxidicae (talk) 15:49, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on IVM Podcasts requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 03:07, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for this tag. I clearly jumped the gun on it, and have now removed it. Apologies again! AleatoryPonderings (talk) 13:11, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's fine mate. LΞVIXIUS💬 16:34, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Did you edit out the part where Mexicans are smuggled across US borders to help out Joe Biden? Because your edit was just less than an hour ago. Interestingly enough, it was brought up during the US presidential debate.

So yeah, makes one wonder why you're actively shilling for Democrats. AlucardAFT3003 (talk) 03:33, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That paragraph was (imo) unnecessary uncited jargon that was contributing nothing wasn't already elaborated on, so I had it purged while proofreading. If you believe I was wrong, feel free to bring it up or re-add those. I didn't do it to help Biden, although I did find that article because of the debate. LΞVIXIUS💬 04:53, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

Hinduism in Sri Lanka

added links pointing to Pantheon, Portuguese and Colonial period

Coyote (person)

added a link pointing to Mexican

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:14, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't give out my personal emails but thank you for reaching out. Yes I'm him. Never got anything but hurt and betrayed by being in that film. What does "across the aisle" mean. You mean across the sea? I have a lot of admiration for my Indian brothers fighting against bigotry and discrimination. desmay (talk) 02:45, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So sorry to hear that. 'Across the aisle' actually meant across the political aisle lol, since I'm pretty left. Also, the admiration is symmetrical. LΞVIXIUS💬 11:18, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:57, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Isnt. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 30#Isnt until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:47, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Levixius, I was popping through your talk page when I noticed a strange fellow leaning into my page from the left! I was most shocked, and after a few moments to collect myself, I resolved that I should have to contact you to ask you how you did that! How did you do that? Amazing, however you did it. Well, consider this me saying hi! Yours, Joe 18:02, 01 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

lol, hi Joe. Sorry for the late reply there. Nice to meet you.

I found the peeking thing a few months ago on some wikipedia joke page. It's not terribly hard to do, it's just a gif ([1]) that's attached to the right side of the screen. LΞVIXIUS💬 15:20, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Levixius! Since the time I posted and now, I figured out how to do this! Behold, BALL:

There's so much great stuff to steal off other people's wiki pages! I might add Jimbo peeking in to my own page. Thanks for the reply. (Also, dang, you know you've got a nice name?) Hope you're well! Joe (talk) 06:56, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you ever see something cool on someone else's user page and you wanna reproduce it, al you have to do it is to hit "Edit" and switch to wiki text mode (rather than Visual Editor). That way, you should see the code you need to add to your page. — Python Drink (talk) 00:10, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Diljaan, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Mccapra (talk) 14:38, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The article May Day riots of 2021 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Wikipedia is not a newspaper, per WP:NOTNEWS

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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 page 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. CommanderWaterford (talk) 18:52, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kalinjar Fort, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Mughal, Sanad and Harsh Vardhan.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Michael Kirkbride 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/Michael Kirkbride until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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.

– Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 01:23, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Antilia bomb scare, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Battery.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:56, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Murder of Ki Suk Han, is not suitable as written to remain published, as it contains no content. I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 13:01, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yeah, forgot we could do that, thanks LΞVIXIUS💬 13:05, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The consensus to put "allegedly heckled" in quotes was reached in June 2020 in this series of diffs, and the page has remained stable ever since. It doesn't matter how many people are involved in the discussion. If agreement is reached, it is reached, and you need to get a new agreement to make further changes. If you wish to change the wording, please gain consensus first. And please assume good faith. Edit summaries like this do you no favours. Thank you. Lard Almighty (talk) 05:52, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The article Arrest of Vijay Singh Yadav has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Delete as per WP:NOTNEWS.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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 page 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. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 22:42, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Arrest of Vijay Singh Yadav 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/Arrest of Vijay Singh Yadav until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:15, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jarvo 69 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/Jarvo 69 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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.

Usedtobecool ☎️ 04:08, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Levixius. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Diljaan, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 15:01, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:53, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the {{proposed deletion/dated}} tag from Sympulse, which you proposed for deletion. A7 does not apply. The article contains two credible claims of importance/significance: it is hosted by a notable institution (the university); it has hosted notable celebrity guests. Take it to AfD instead. If there's significant, independent coverage out there, it's hiding well. If you still think this article should be deleted, please do not add {{proposed deletion}} back to the page. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! asilvering (talk) 00:51, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Earl Silverman, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Founder.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Levixius. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Murder of Ki Suk Han, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 14:01, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the {{proposed deletion/dated}} tag from Bachcha Munsi, which you proposed for deletion. The article passes WP:NPOL since India has a federal system of government, and he was a member of a state assembly. If you still think this article should be deleted, please do not add {{proposed deletion}} back to the page. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:27, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add defamatory content to Wikipedia, as you did at Azam Khan (politician), you may be blocked from editing. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 01:40, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Students' Federation of India, you may be blocked from editing. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 02:35, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you disagree with some/any of my edits, I'm afraid you should take it up in the respective talk pages. Kindly don't randomly threathen me with blocks. Regards. LΞVIXIUS💬 15:28, 16 February 2022 (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 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 the 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.

Tayi Arajakate _Talk 01:42, 14 February 2022 (UTC) There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.Tayi Arajakate _Talk 00:02, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Unfortunately I'm not very active on this website since I have things going on in my real (off-internet) life, so I couldn't respond to that discussion. However, it appears that it has failed to provide any fruitful results. My sincere condolences. LΞVIXIUS💬 17:19, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Yeah unfortunately, it got overlooked and archived. You should consider it to be a final warning. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 04:09, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy by inserting unsourced or poorly sourced defamatory or otherwise controversial content into an article or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at Melina Abdullah. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 04:09, 2 March 2022 (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 post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. 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 the 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.

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 gender-related disputes or controversies or in people associated with them. 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 the 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.

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 articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. 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 the 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.

Hi, please see the discussion Talk:2022_BJP_Muhammad_remarks_controversy#Murder_of_Kanhaiya_Lal. Follow the WP:SPLIT rules for this article. Venkat TL (talk) 16:28, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to put in some effort in expanding the article and providing more details by using reliable sources. You may want to look at Murder of Samuel Paty for ideas. I won't be surprised if the article gets tagged for deletion soon. NebulaOblongata (talk) 19:20, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked for two weeks for persistent tendentious editing about both Indian and American subjects. Compare this warning concerning Melina Abdullah, and this edit to Kyle Rittenhouse. I regret not seeing this ANI thread at the time, or you'd have been blocked sooner and longer. Bishonen | tålk 11:27, 18 July 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Tek Fog, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Thank you. Kautilya3 (talk) 14:10, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:45, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Your recent talk page comments on Talk:The Wire (India) were not added to the bottom of the page. New discussion page messages and topics should always be added to the bottom. Your message may have been moved. In the future you can use the "New section" link in the top right. For more details see the talk page guidelines. Thank you. Kautilya3 (talk) 18:22, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is about your post here. Don't ping a selection of users that you have taken from the page's edit history, as that lends itself to selection bias (=either deliberately or subconsciously pinging people likely to agree with you). Ping all, or none, of the people in the history. (Personally, I would always prefer pinging nobody; interested people can be assumed to be watching the talkpage.) Using your own selection is known as canvassing, and is not allowed. Please don't do it again. I'm afraid your attempt to get consensus concerning the original research issue ("So here's me trying to get consensus on whether this is Original Research or Not") has been compromised by your selective pinging.

By the way, your new section should have been put at the bottom of the page, not the top. People are more likely to see it in the place where they normally look for new posts, and so, again, there would be the less need for pings. (I see Kautilya has moved it down for you.) Bishonen | tålk 10:04, 2 December 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! Kautilya3 (talk) 10:07, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently made edits related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. This is a standard message to inform you that India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. Kautilya3 (talk) 10:08, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on 2022 Muhammad remarks controversy. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Kautilya3 (talk) 00:20, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Google Podcasts app 8th July 2020.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:16, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons, as you did to Hardeep Singh Nijjar. Thank you. Vladimir.copic (talk) 13:32, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, all information I added in said edit was either properly referenced or summarised from the content of the page, which is perfectly appropriate as per WP:MoS/LEAD. Thanks LΞVIXIUS💬 17:12, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:58, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Anti-Brahminism, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 14:54, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Anti-Brahminism. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 17:17, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit that you made to User talk:Joshua Jonathan#Disruptive Edits has been reverted or removed because it was a misuse of a warning or blocking template. 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. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 17:18, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently made edits related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. This is a standard message to inform you that India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 15:06, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits to Anti-Brahminism have been highly tendentious and also poorly sourced. Please stop, or you risk being topic banned from Indian subjects. Also, this very recent edit of Flavia Agnes has no support in the given source, which has nothing to say about decriminalizing rape of boys. That is possibly a conclusion you yourself make from the text of the source (a.k.a. original research). I'd self-revert if I were you. Bishonen | tålk 15:54, 2 May 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Hi! Regarding the Agnes article, the only time child rape laws in India were made gender neutral was with the introduction of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses Act, which is also the only law that criminalizes it against boys. This isn't as much as original research as it is a direct conclusion that can be drawn from that source, no subjectivity involved. Perhaps I erred in the statement about decriminalizing, should have instead opted for 'opposing criminalizing,' but regardless, it is a good faith edit.

Secondly, I don't see the issue with regarding my edits in Anti-Brahaminism. All three of the sources I've mentioned are quoted as such. Scholarly opinion (De Roover, Novetzke) on the issue is dilligently quoted as such, and the same will be said for the Hindu American Foundation's views. Excluding these prominent sources would instead constitute a WP:NPOV violation.

Regards, LΞVIXIUS💬 16:30, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

For continued tendentious editing of Anti-Brahminism, especially your insistence on the poorly sourced comparison with antisemitism (which you gave its own section on the strength of one opinion piece), you have been indefinitely page-blocked from the article. Note that you can still edit the talkpage (which you have so far not done, though you tell Joshua Jonathan he needs to go there) as well as the rest of Wikipedia. Please take this as a shot across the bow; a topic ban from Indian subjects, a much stronger sanction, would come next. You can request unblock from an uninvolved administrator by placing {{unblock|your reason here}} on this page. Bishonen | tålk 17:39, 2 May 2024 (UTC).[reply]

So it's now possible to block a user from editing only a single page? That's cool and minimizes the need to block editors all together which just makes us lose editors. — Python Drink (talk) 00:15, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Levixius (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I have made good faith edits, and despite clear disruptive removal by User:Joshua Jonathan, I have sought a discussion on talk page so he can raise his concerns and perhaps we could proceed to a consensus, as I firmly believe the onus is on him to explain his removal of said Content. I have also clearly explained why I have reverted said edits. In every step of the way I have been well in line with Wikipedia's established Policy:Universal_Code_of_Conduct,

Moreover, I have previously replied to User:Bishonen's concerns regarding my edits, and acted on the issues he had pointed out, namely, [1] fixed the only lack of proper sourcing I could find in said edit, and [2] fixed the improper wording in the other edit.

In English Wikipedia, admins hold tools to further the goals of Wikipedia. These tools do not, in the words of Jimbo himself, make them an authority on said rules. Bishonen could have called for arbitration, or called the disputing user to the talk page. Instead he has based a ban on his own personal opinions. Bishonen has chosen to not only ignore an already written reply to his concerns, but has taken action and threatened me with further bans. This amount of prejudice and failure to communicate is a clear as a violation of WP:ADMINCOND and WP:ADMINACCT for lack of civility and accountability.

It is thus, that I am appealing this block, as well as raising a ticket at WP:XRV. LΞVIXIUS💬 18:29, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Your personal attack below is utterly unacceptable. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 20:27, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

LΞVIXIUS💬 18:29, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have sought a discussion on talk page - where? Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 19:14, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On edit summaries, which I'd assume you'd have read before the repeated reverting. LΞVIXIUS💬 19:22, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bishonen's message didn't get through? Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 19:28, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Buddy if you're gonna taunt me you're gonna have to do better than dickride a wikipedia admin. I have been more than civil to you. LΞVIXIUS💬 19:34, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that sure wasn't wise. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 20:26, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Levixius. Thank you for your work on Vishnu Tiwari. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 23:18, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:46, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]