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.
It is irrelevant that how many media outlets have covered any incident" is the problem. Because WP:Five pillars tells you, "
We strive for articles in an impartial tone that document and explain major points of view, giving due weight for their prominence." Do you understand what that means? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:53, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
PLz discuss the edit you did on 2021 Farmers' Republic day parade. The onus lies onyou DavidWood11 (talk) 11:38, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, DavidWood11! I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may still benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:
Need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.
If you don't already know, you should sign your posts on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) to insert your username and the date.
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! MBlaze Lightning 10:33, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
Please do not use all capital letters in your edit summaries. It looks like your are shouting and it contrary to WP:CIVIL and WP:SHOUT. Thanks Robynthehode (talk) 10:22, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
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. Bishonen | tålk 12:24, 5 February 2021 (UTC).
Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. I am glad to see that you are discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Talk:The Wire (India) are for discussion related to improving (a) an encyclopedia article in specific ways based on reliable sources or (b) project policies and guidelines. They are not for general discussion about the article topic or unrelated topics, or statements based on your thoughts or feelings. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. — Newslinger talk 09:46, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Tayi Arajakate Talk 06:13, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Yogi Adityanath, you may be blocked from editing. Tayi Arajakate Talk 07:44, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you use Wikipedia for promotion or advertising, as you did at Yogi Adityanath. Tayi Arajakate Talk 09:16, 21 April 2021 (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 12:28, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
It is clear that you are not here to contribute to building an encyclopaedia but rather to push your POV. Any further edits like this and your editing privileges will be revoked.—SpacemanSpiff 07:21, 4 July 2021 (UTC) Discuss how DavidWood11 (talk) 07:24, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Hi , requesting extended protected access. Thanks
((Edit extended-protected))
template if necessary to gain attention. Hope this helps. Bishonen | tålk 18:15, 4 October 2021 (UTC).
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on The Wire (India). 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:
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. -- Toddy1 (talk) 13:05, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
((unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~))
. HighInBC Need help? Just ask. 09:06, 12 October 2021 (UTC)Twice now, here and here the issue with your competency has come up. Both times you disappeared until the discussion was archived. This needs to be addressed before you are allowed to edit again. HighInBC Need help? Just ask. 09:08, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
Reviewing admin see also[4]. This can be handled at reviewing admin's discretion without further permission from me, I am of course available for discussion. HighInBC Need help? Just ask. 02:36, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
DavidWood11: I'm hesitant to say this since it should be WP:NOTTHEM anyway but I feel I should point out there's an inherent contradiction between claiming you have a "best practice to engage with other editor in a civil manner" and you seeing you made a false accusation of vandalism very recently [5] [6] [7]. A false accusation of vandalism is a personal attack and therefore is inherently not civil and it's even worse when you feel the need to repeat it in 3 different places.
As for your disappearance whenever your editing was called into question before, even if we accept that you genuinely didn't have time previously when questions were raised, you still needed to deal with it when you did have time. This means reading what was said, taking onboard and comments about your behaviour and seeking feedback where needed to improve. But whatever, that's also in the past.
You now need to demonstrate you understand how you've gone wrong and how you will try to avoid such mistakes in the future to be unblocked. So take a read of the most recent thread and the previous threads about your behaviour, take a read of the relevant guidelines and policies and ask questions if you're still confused. Just saying you didn't really do anything wrong is not going to cut it.
DavidWood11 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
See, Discussing about ::::(a) my action WP:NOTTHEM e.g. my accusation of vandalism on Tayi Arajakate, or ::::(b) my accusations on others related to off wiki-co-ordinated attack on me ::::is subjective, and i was and always will be defending them via talk pages or ANI notice board as the case maybe. ::::# I have read the essay WP:VANDAL before leveling my accusations, and i am ready to defend my action in a proper way. ::::#As, far as my backlog ANI notice. I can also defend the same. DavidWood11 (talk) 04:34, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that
Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Tiderolls 12:19, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
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.
WP:EXPLAINBLOCK DavidWood11 (talk) 06:57, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
DavidWood11 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
WP:EXPLAINBLOCK DavidWood11 (talk) 16:44, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that
Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 16:59, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
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.
WP:EXPLAINBLOCK DavidWood11 (talk) 07:21, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
Toddy, you are uninvolved in blocking me HIgh in BC does. Plz avoid any comment here. HIgh in BC. Plz explain WP:EXPLAINBLOCK pointwise nothing is clear. DavidWood11 (talk) 10:39, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
HighInBC You have blocked me out of blue in a response to (and immediately after) filing TrangaBellam my this compalin against a user in guise of my backlog ANI notice, to which i said above that i can defend that. You faileD to respond my multiple request of WP:EXPLAINBLOCK This is a clear case of WP:ADMINABUSE. You are misuing your ability of sysop. DavidWood11 (talk) 10:54, 15 October 2021 (UTC)