User talk:Signswork

Welcome!

Hello, Signswork, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Lalit Jagannath (talk) 11:45, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Wikipedia. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you.

In other words, editors are advised to give rationals, sentence-by-sentence, for deleting (in this case, perhaps a hundred) citations from reliable sources like United Nations or World Bank.Lalit Jagannath (talk) 11:45, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to blank out or delete portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing.

Instead of forcing other editors to undo your edits, you could self-revert your many section removals/reverts (including [1][2][3]) and repeat them this way:

Take a sentence.
Think if you could rephrase it or move it to some other location in the article or elsewhere.
Write an edit summary which explains clearly why it should be removed. In other words, "rv racist troll. WP:UNDUE weight given to tendentious claims"[4] is not enough.
And if you want to contribute a replacement for the citation, it must have inline references.

Lalit Jagannath (talk) 16:15, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

January 2009[edit]

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits, such as those you made to Pollution of Ganga. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, you will be blocked from editing. Dekisugi (talk) 11:47, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there[edit]

Please stop reverting people. The Economist links are not linkspam. Try to discuss whatever issues are with the article on talk pages. --Unpopular Opinion (talk) 11:58, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for continued disruptive editing - whilst I did try and give you the benefit of the doubt your constant reversions at Economy of India have led me to the conclusion that you are not listening. If you come back with the same style of editing I will block you indefinitely.. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. --VS ^talk 12:20, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

3 revert warning[edit]

I am also going to add a three revert warning below - so that you are fully informed for future edits. Standby - templated warning is on its way.--VS ^talk 12:23, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. --VS ^talk 12:24, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]