First edit :))

Your recent editing history at Arabic numerals 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. JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 22:41, 28 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Discuss your concerns on the talk page of article Arabic Numerals as it is a genuine concern over there as well. Do not engage in edit war causing POV concerns as well . Lptx (talk) 22:43, 28 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Kleuske (talk) 23:00, 28 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This will boomrang spectacularly. Lptx (talk) 00:01, 29 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Lptx reported by User:JohnBlackburne (Result: ). Thank you. JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 23:27, 28 March 2018 (UTC)iReply[reply]

JohnBlackburne (talk · contribs), I informed you to look at the discussion page. You seem to interested in escalating trivial things. I have made my position clear on the page. Expecting a correct descsion soon. Lptx (talk) 00:04, 29 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Wikipedia talk:Sockpuppet investigations. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. 青い(Aoi) (talk) 23:55, 28 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Aoi) aye aye.. I have added this - "laughter therapy is good for health" and removed the content you raised concern for. Those all accounts have the very same person behind them. Please look into them. ThanksLptx (talk) 00:00, 29 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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.

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 ~~~~)).  SarekOfVulcan (talk) 01:04, 29 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[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).

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

---

Request reason:

It seems Wikipedia had become Christians mouthpiece to sway the public opinion. It is utterly ridiculous and disgusting experience where three fellows who don't have an iota of any knowledge are trying to whitewash things and attribute the recorded works of Arabs to Hindus and further the irony is that in enitere hindu history there is no written record of Arabic Numerals being used. It is high time we Muslims need to recognise that your very target is to snatch everything that belongs to us by lies and treachery. The facts don't matter to you, you are only interested in swaying away the public opinion. Lptx (talk) 3:47 pm, Today (UTC+2)

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

• the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
• the block is no longer necessary because you
  1. understand what you have been blocked for,
  2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
  3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Vanjagenije (talk) 13:55, 29 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[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.

1. I explained to you what I was trying to do - I was trying to edit an article where some folks have written that Arabic Numerals were borrowed from India. In entire India, not even a single historical record exist that says, these numerals were even used in India. The only document is by Al-Khwarzimi, which does not say so. So this notion of calling Arabic Numerals as indian is only mythology

2. I am not a victim. I assure you - I will make a medium of information for Arab world and I will arrange funds to do so. We'll ban this Christianr propaganda mouthpiece in every Muslim Country.

3. You folks are hypocrites. All your ancestors have learned is from the translations of Muslim and Arab books. Today you try to white wash this fact.

Go fuck yourself with this trash of a medium.

Thanks for making me realise - why Arabs should study and not get befooled by your propaganda. Lptx (talk) 14:11, 29 March 2018 (UTC) Lptx (talk) 14:11, 29 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[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).

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

---

Request reason:

1. I explained to you what I was trying to do - I was trying to edit an article where some folks have written that Arabic Numerals were borrowed from India. In entire India, not even a single historical record exist that says, these numerals were even used in India. The only document is by Al-Khwarzimi, which does not say so. So this notion of calling Arabic Numerals as indian is only mythology

2. I am not a victim. I assure you - I will make a medium of information for Arab world and I will arrange funds to do so. We'll ban this Christianr propaganda mouthpiece in every Muslim Country.

3. You folks are hypocrites. All your ancestors have learned is from the translations of Muslim and Arab books. Today you try to white wash this fact.

Go fuck yourself with this trash of a medium.

Thanks for making me realise - why Arabs should study and not get befooled by your propaganda Lptx (talk) 14:31, 29 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Decline reason:

For continuing your attacks here in your unblock request, I have raised your block to indefinite. If you make any further attacks, you should expect to lose the ability to edit this talk page too. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:37, 29 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[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.