User talk:Accesscrawl/Archives/Archive 3

Disambiguation link notification for August 26

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Banikhet, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chamba (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:12, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

 Done Accesscrawl (talk) 17:43, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 2

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Leila Araghian, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Aga Khan Award (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

 Done Accesscrawl (talk) 16:38, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of The House of Fine Art

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.

A tag has been placed on The House of Fine Art requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company, corporation or organization that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Theroadislong (talk) 19:52, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of The House of Fine Art for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The House of Fine Art 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/The House of Fine Art until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:16, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Ways to improve 2017 in Indian television

Hi, I'm Bennv3771. Accesscrawl, thanks for creating 2017 in Indian television!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Also note that the names of the television shows should be in italics.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Bennv3771 (talk) 11:48, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Vandalistic edit

Please don't make reverts like this one. I've explained every bit at the Talk:The House of Fine Art, and you are welcome to discuss any issue there. In fact, I haven't removed any content yet – I just removed the repeated sources with clear explanations. Thanks. - NitinMlk (talk) 04:08, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

September 2018

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on The House of Fine Art. 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.

Points to note:

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 and 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.
In spite of my multiple polite requests to join the discussion at the article's talk page, you have again restored the mess, every bit of which was removed by me with clear explanations at the article's talk page. So I am yet again requesting you to join the discussion at the article's talk page. NitinMlk (talk) 04:59, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

@NitinMlk: I tried follow WP:BRD. I don't see that there can be clear agreement for your edits in future. Accesscrawl (talk) 05:05, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

You are yet again assuming bad faith against me. Please tell at the article's talk page the reason for restoring the user-generated/redundant sources. Thanks. - NitinMlk (talk) 05:12, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

I am still waiting for your response at the article's talk page. If there's any issue, then please discuss it there. And if you've realised your mistake, then please self-revert your vandalism. Thanks. - NitinMlk (talk) 05:32, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello User:Accesscrawl. See WP:ANI#Query where NitinMik complained to administrators about this issue. You can respond to that complaint if you wish. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 17:37, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Khalistan movement talk page

I had already removed specific instances of personal attack in this edit. The remaining part of the comment is merely uncivil, which doesn't warrant removal per WP:TPG. Why did you remove the complete comment? —Gazoth (talk) 10:20, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

"pathetic edit" is uncivil. Policies on refactoring don't allow modification of others comments and the entire tone and motive behind that comment is to attack/disparage others. No reason to find sense in his comments, he is probably a WP:NOTHERE SPA. Accesscrawl (talk) 10:41, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Please read this notification carefully, it contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

A community decision has authorised the use of general sanctions for pages related to the blockchain and cryptocurrencies. The details of these sanctions are described here. All pages that are broadly related to these topics are subject to a one revert per twenty-four hours restriction, as described here.

General sanctions notice

General sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Jytdog (talk) 20:40, 9 September 2018 (UTC)