User talk:Surpalsingh

Welcome![edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia, Surpalsingh! Thank you for your contributions. I am NonsensicalSystem and I have been editing Wikipedia for some time, so if you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{help me}} at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! N0nsensical.system^(err0r?)_(.log) 11:51, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

April 2020[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at 2020 Tablighi Jamaat coronavirus hotspot in Delhi. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose their editing privileges. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to result in loss of your editing privileges. Thank you. Capewearer (talk) 10:03, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well ok but are you deleting the tablighi page huh? Surpalsingh (talk) 10:08, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Surpalsingh (talk) 10:12, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey listen you islamic pig Surpalsingh (talk) 10:17, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm DVdm. I noticed that you made a comment on the page User talk:Surpalsingh with this edit that didn't seem very civil, so I removed it. Wikipedia needs people like you and me to collaborate, so it’s one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. DVdm (talk) 10:19, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok Surpalsingh (talk) 10:23, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

But first tell that cape man to answer my question Surpalsingh (talk) 10:24, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You can try to convincingly apologise to that person. If/when they accept the apology, you can try to ask the question again. - DVdm (talk) 10:28, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(slur redacted), im sorry and now answer my question "why did you remove the tablighi page?. Surpalsingh (talk) 10:31, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at 2020 Tablighi Jamaat coronavirus hotspot in Delhi shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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 the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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 you 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.
This is your last warning! Kautilya3 (talk) 11:11, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok first tell me why do you guys want to keep that page deleted? Surpalsingh (talk) 14:16, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ARBIPA sanctions alert[edit]

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.

Kautilya3 (talk) 11:18, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits[edit]

Hi Surpalsingh, your contributions to wikipedia have included quite a bit of hostile language and an unableness to cope with an article being deleted, and currently going through a deletion review. I should not need to, but I will remind you that one of wikipedias main pillars is to be WP:CIVIL to each other, and assume WP:GOODFAITH. If you continue down this road, you will get a block. Settle down, and try to improve items on the project. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:50, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

April 2020[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for making personal attacks towards other editors.

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 ~~~~}}. Yunshui ^雲 _水 12:02, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Surpalsingh[edit]

Please do not introduce inappropriate pages, such as User:Surpalsingh, to Wikipedia. Doing so is considered to be vandalism and is prohibited. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges.

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. Invalid ^OS _talk 12:21, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry[edit]

This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing for sock puppetry per evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Surpalsingh. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. Your ability to edit this talk page has also been revoked. If you believe that this block was in error, and you would like to be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then appeal to the Unblock Ticket Request System or the Arbitration Committee at arbcom-enwikimedia.org. Cabayi (talk) 15:28, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]