User talk:103.5.134.163

To edit, please log in.

Editing by unregistered users from your shared IP address or address range may be currently disabled due to abuse. However, you are still able to edit if you sign in with an account. If you are currently blocked from creating an account, and cannot create one elsewhere in the foreseeable future, you may follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Request an account to request that volunteers create your username for you. Please use an email address issued to you by your ISP, school or organization so that we may verify that you are a legitimate user on this network. Please reference this block in the comment section of the form.

Please check on this list that the username you choose has not already been taken. We apologize for any inconvenience.

Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Niveda Thomas, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source, so I removed it. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. 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! Materialscientist (talk) 05:20, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Vb on web

Hello, 103.5.134.163. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Vb on web".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Legacypac (talk) 09:10, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

February 2018

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to The Comedy of Errors has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: The Comedy of Errors was changed by 103.5.134.163 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.8787 on 2018-02-11T16:24:29+00:00 .

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 16:24, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

August 2018

Hello, I'm Shellwood. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Xseed education— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help Desk or my talk page. Thank you. Shellwood (talk) 01:57, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

October 2018

Please do not add or change content without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 09:50, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

March 2019

Please refrain from attempting to make unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been disallowed by an edit filter. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Materialscientist (talk) 07:01, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

May 2020

Hello, I'm DiplomatTesterMan. Your recent edit(s) to the page Pulitzer Prize appear to have added incorrect information, so they have been removed for now. If you believe the information was correct, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. 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. DTM (talk) 11:49, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Important Notice

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.

Template:Z33 Doug Weller talk 13:29, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

September 2020

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Talk:2020 Delhi riots, you may be blocked from editing. Template:Z188 331dot (talk) 19:40, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

331dot  I merely questioned the one-sided narratives and the selective narrative on Talk:2020 Delhi riots. Please do share any edits that i have committed there, if any at all.

Your posts there contributed nothing to the discussion. If you have specific concerns about the content of the article, please bring them up along with properly sourced proposed changes, without accusing other editors of an agenda or being "leftists". This is a collaborative project where we all must work with people with differing viewpoints. Please review the talk page discussion and frequently asked questions at the top of the talk page. 331dot (talk) 11:04, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

331dot I questioned the fact, that the editors of the page refuse to discuss the Police investigations, the confessions of Tahir Hussain and the links to certain extremist organizations in the one-sided page. Questioning this does not amount to vandalism and the fact you think that it does not contribute to the discussion seems to be your personal opinion, like the rest of the content on the page.

There is no independent reliable source for a confession; it seems to be the word of one rogue police officer speaking unofficially, and the supposed "confession" was made without legal counsel(who would certainly have advised him to not confess), and his legal counsel says he did not confess. In addition, per WP:BLP we cannot put information about confessions as it would suggest he is guilty of a crime, which only a court of law can determine. Again, if you have specific, reliably sourced changed to propose, then do so, but you must work with others who disagree with you and not call them "leftists' or anti-Hindu or whatever. We're focused on summarizing what independent reliable sources state. 331dot (talk) 11:36, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

331dot https://www.outlookindia.com/website/story/india-news-goons-threw-petrol-bombs-from-tahir-hussains-house-deceased-ib-staffers-father-in-fir/348017

https://www.timesnownews.com/delhi/article/raining-stones-and-bombs-rioters-used-makeshift-catapults-and-slingshots-to-target-people-watch/558767 Do these qualify as a reliable source? DIY catapults similar in design to the ones used in Mosul by ISIS were installed on the multiple rooftops including the house of one Tahir Hussain. Can you please add this to the page after verifying the links i have shared. I already see various links from outlook on multiple wikipedia pages as reliable sources? 331dot

We have found that most Indian media is too one sided on this event to be used as independent reliable sources. Looking at this story and its characterization I'm not sure I disagree in this case. However, if you can participate in the spirit I describe here, please use the article talk page. 331dot (talk) 11:58, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

331dot Can you please point me to an international media outlet that you think is not one-sided or what qualifies as an independent reliable source please. I have long givenup on trying to correct the highly biased content and selective facts on 2020 Delhi Riots page. There's a saying from where I come from- You cannot wake a person pretending to be asleep.

October 2020

Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I noticed that in this edit to Ashwini Akkunji, 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. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 15:54, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or significantly change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did with this edit to Ashwini Akkunji. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Materialscientist (talk) 15:56, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello (talk) I do not recall visiting or editing this page.

You may not have, if this is a shared IP. 331dot (talk) 11:01, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I rather think that I asked a bunch of uncomfortable questions and I got blocked. (talk) (talk)

A bunch of wiki fascists are masquerading as editors and moderators here. (talk) (talk) blocked my IP address and do not even have the courtesy to reply and justify their actions.

Calling us fascists and other names will not help you get unblocked. Please see WP:AAB for how to appeal, and WP:GAB to learn how to craft an acceptable unblock request. 331dot (talk) 20:04, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply! Heil (talk)

December 2020

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).

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

Request reason:

Why on earth is a Starbucks IP blocked?

Decline reason:

Because of inappropriate editing. If you were not responsible for any inappropriate edits, you are welcome to request an account at WP:ACC so you can avoid getting caught up in blocks meant to target others. 331dot (talk) 20:24, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[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.

What do you mean by Target Others? And looks you are personally invested in this block looking at the page history? Can this block be please reviewed by another admin who is neutral?(talk)

IP addresses are potentially used by multiple people, but we don't know who is sitting at the computer editing. If it wasn't you, you should request an account. I have no personal interest here whatsoever, but if you make another unblock request, someone else will review it. 331dot (talk) 21:04, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(talk) Is IP address editing with correct references disallowed on Wikipedia now? I can choose to use my IP address or create an account, both of which are currently permitted on Wikipedia, as long as I am not violating a WP rule. It is obvious your personally invested in this block to "Target Others" which IMO is abuse of your admin privileges. Can you please stay off this IP Talk page irrespective of whatever past fixations you have, while someone truly neutral reviews my request?

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

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

Request reason:

Why on earth is a Starbucks IP blocked? can a truly neutral admin who has no personal involvement in the previous conversations or blocks review this unfair block of a publc IP Address that is shared?

Notes:

In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=Why on earth is a Starbucks IP blocked? can a  truly neutral admin who has no personal involvement in the previous conversations or blocks review this unfair block of a publc IP Address that is shared? |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=Why on earth is a Starbucks IP blocked? can a  truly neutral admin who has no personal involvement in the previous conversations or blocks review this unfair block of a publc IP Address that is shared? |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=Why on earth is a Starbucks IP blocked? can a  truly neutral admin who has no personal involvement in the previous conversations or blocks review this unfair block of a publc IP Address that is shared? |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.