User talk:Panjikar

Welcome![edit]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:

Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
No edit warring or abuse of multiple accounts.
If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject. Deliberately adding such content or otherwise editing articles maliciously is considered vandalism; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Kautilya3 (talk) 11:35, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

May 2017[edit]

Hello, I'm Jim1138. I noticed that in this edit to Goud Saraswat Brahmin, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Jim1138 (talk) 07:13, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi jim ,I have read that source yesteraday.The user had copied line to line ditto from the authors book without any self editing.Hope you know the violation of rule in this case. Panjikar (talk) 07:20, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Daivadnya Brahmin[edit]

Hi, I have reverted your removals at Daivadnya Brahmin for various reasons. Some examples are:

You said that sources must be in English (not true)
You said that we must have evidence of caste self-identification for dead people (not true)
You claimed some stuff from a non-English source was a copy/paste but the statements in the article were written in English
You said that sources must be available digitally (not true)

There may have been some good work mixed among all those problems and more but, really, as a whole that series of edits around 10 July was very disruptive. I think you should review WP:RS and WP:COPYRIGHT in particular. - Sitush (talk) 14:59, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

July 2017[edit]

The Wikipedia community has permitted administrators to impose discretionary sanctions on any editor who is active on any page about social groups, explicitly including caste associations and political parties, related to India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal. Discretionary sanctions can be used against an editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process. If you engage in further inappropriate behavior in this area, you may be placed under sanctions, which can include blocks, a revert limitation, or a topic ban. The discussion leading to the imposition of these sanctions can be read here.

Please familiarise yourself with the information page at Wikipedia:General sanctions/South Asian social groups.

—SpacemanSpiff 03:18, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Daivadnya Brahmin again[edit]

Did you look at my edit summaries for the content that you have now restored to Daivadnya Brahmin? You have reinstated gibberish. - Sitush (talk) 16:16, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Look, I have explained this previously but it looks like you do not want to listen, hence you have added something else back again. Mentioning the gazette is just unnecessary, and citing a primary source in the way that you did to substantiate that they are one of the few OBC Brahmin communities is original research. You have been made aware of the sanctions regime that exists for articles such that Daivadnya Brahmin so I suggest that you self-revert before some administrator decides to impose a sanction on you. - Sitush (talk) 20:42, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notice that you are now subject to a community enforced topic ban[edit]

For For repeated disruptive editing including edit warring to add original research, synthesis and POV and uncollaborative editing, I have decided, in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the terms of this community discussion, to impose the following sanction on you:

indefinitely topic banned from editing about castes, social groups, etc of South Asia anywhere on the English Wikipedia; this includes anywhere on articles, talk pages, user and user talk pages, categories, templates and anything else on the English Wikipedia

This sanction has been logged at Wikipedia:General sanctions/South Asian social groups. If the sanction includes a ban, please read the banning policy to ensure you understand what this means. If you do not comply with this sanction, you may be blocked for an extended period, by way of enforcement of this sanction—and you may also be made subject to further sanctions.

You may appeal this sanction to the community at the administrators' noticeboard. You may also appeal directly to me on my talk page, before or instead of appealing to the noticeboard. Even if you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are also free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you. —SpacemanSpiff 00:17, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

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 ~~~~}}. Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:04, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]