User talk:Teja srinivas

Welcome!

Hello, Teja srinivas, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to RSS pracharaks in Prominent public positions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

• Introduction and Getting started
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing 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 click here to ask for help here on your talk page and a volunteer will visit you here shortly. Again, welcome! : Noyster (talk), 19:05, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Wikipedia from me as well! Thanks for all your work on the list of RSS people in public positions. It would be a good idea to create such controversial pages on your private user space first, get a few of us to review it, and then publish it on main Wikipedia space. To create a userspace page, just try to go to "User:Teja srivinas/PAGENAME", and the system will give you a link to create such a page.

I also noticed that there were some edits on that page that said "mass deletion". Do you know there was a mass deletion of your content? Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 19:13, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of RSS pracharaks in Prominent public positions for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article RSS pracharaks in Prominent public positions is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RSS pracharaks in Prominent public positions until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. : Noyster (talk), 17:08, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Swayamsevaks in Prominent public positions, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Nityanand Swami, Minister of Railways and Harsh Vardhan. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:53, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Removed disambiguations Teja srinivas (talk) 06:23, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Swayamsevaks in Prominent public positions

Hi Teja Srinivas, are you planning to work on the Swayamsevaks in Prominent public positions page any further? If so, can you please participate in the discussion on the article talk page? Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 15:57, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Your contributed article, History of GDP of India after Independence

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, History of GDP of India after Independence. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Economic history of India. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Economic history of India – you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to 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 removed 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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. ƬheStrikeΣagle 15:30, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

December 2014

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Economy of India. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. ƬheStrikeΣagle 15:53, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

I actually added source today noon. But it was deleted. Teja srinivas (talk) 15:57, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Sagarika

I have reverted your edits on the page of Sagarika Ghose. Can you please provide proper sources or tell me why it was wrong to revert you. Thanks -sarvajna (talk) 08:08, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

These are my sources for my edit "Ghose, and other female Indian journalists like Barkha Dutt, have been criticised by many contrarian views on social media sites like Twitter." : http://mumbaiboss.com/2012/08/20/why-is-sagarika-ghose-trending-on-twitter/ http://www.mensxp.com/technology/internet/3480-the-funniest-tweets-sagarika-ghose.html

So, I have undone your reverts so that I can add citations. Teja srinivas (talk) 08:24, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

December 2014

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Sagarika Ghose. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Blackguard 18:35, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Sagarika Ghose 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 get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's 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.
Since your edits are clearly against consensus, having been reverted by three separate users, you must bring the discussion to the article's talk page and actively participate. Glancing at previous discussions and unilaterally acting against consensus is not going to cut it. Blackguard 23:35, 17 December 2014 (UTC)