User talk:Sabkdada

Welcome!

Hello, Sabkdada! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages.

Getting Started

Introduction • Contributing to Wikipedia • Your first article
The five pillars of Wikipedia • Simplified ruleset
How to: edit a page • upload an image

Getting Help

Policies and Guidelines

Neutral point of view • Verifiability • No original research
Reliable sources • Citing sources • Content guidelines
What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons

Manual of Style (Simplified) • Three-revert rule
Copyrights • Non-free content • Image use policy
External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sockpuppetry
Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community

Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program
Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette
No personal attacks • Resolving disputes
Build consensus • Village pump
Discord server • IRC channels • Mailing lists
The Signpost (Wikipedia's newspaper)

Things to do

Task Center • Be bold in editing
Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles
Join a WikiProject • Translating articles
Cleaning up: General • Copy editing • Vandalism

Miscellaneous

Happy editing! PhilKnight (talk) 07:04, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

March 2025

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, articles should not be moved, as you did to Solid Fuel Ducted Ramjet, without good reason. They should have a name that is both accurate and intuitive. Wikipedia has some guidelines in place to help with this. Generally, a page should only be moved to a new title if the current name doesn't follow these guidelines. Also, if a page move is being discussed, consensus needs to be reached before anybody moves the page. If you would like to experiment with page titles and moving, please use the test Wikipedia. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Dl2000 (talk) 14:56, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Solar Group Nagastra moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Solar Group Nagastra. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 18:11, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi Sabkdada. Thank you for your work on INS Ikshak. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

There's good info in this article but there's little or nothing in the article or the sources about the Ikshak specifically. If that can't be found, suggest merging into the class article.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 20:06, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey your historical Ship was deleted by a editor please add it again

Hey your historical Ship was deleted by a editor please add it again Badrinarayan konar (talk) 10:04, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Solar Group Nagastra

Hello, Sabkdada. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Solar Group Nagastra, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 22:06, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Solar Group Nagastra

Hello, Sabkdada. This message concerns the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Solar Group Nagastra".

Drafts that go unedited for six months are eligible for deletion, in accordance with our draftspace policy, and this one 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 read this, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the draft so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! DreamRimmer bot II (talk) 18:26, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to the region of South Asia (India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal), broadly construed, including but not limited to history, politics, ethnicity, and social groups, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia's norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Additionally, you must be logged in, have 500 edits, and have an account age of 30 days in order to make edits related to two subtopics: (1) Indian military history, or (2) social groups, explicitly including caste associations and political parties related to India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

The Bushranger _{One ping only} 04:08, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

October 2025

To enforce an arbitration decision, and for continuing to use the talk page at in a topic area subject to extended confirmed restrictions (WP:CT/IMH) for purposes other than requesting uncontroversial edits after being warned on the page Talk:Astra (missile), you have been blocked from editing Wikipedia for a period of 48 hours. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block or other sanctions.

If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Please copy my appeal to the [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] or [[WP:AN|administrators' noticeboard]]. Your reason here OR place the reason below this template. ~~~~}}. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard, I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page.

The Bushranger _{One ping only} 03:11, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes"). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 02:58, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Quoting myself from Talk:Astra (missile): On contentious topics designated by the Arbitration Committee that are subject to extended confirmed restrictions, which Indian military history is one of, editors who are not extended confirmed are (a) not allowed to edit the article at all, and (b) are only allowed to edit the article talk page to make noncontroversial editing requests. You have not made any edit requests (there is a specific process for this), and this is not a noncontroversial topic ("noncontroverial" = spelling error corrections and things like that). This is why you were blocked. Upon the block expiring, you double down, establishing that you are not here to help build an encyclopedia. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 02:58, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, please read WP:FREESPEECH. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 03:00, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You made the point that Wikipedia is not about free speech because the Administrators like you deliberately blocks and ban people questioning fake news and propaganda peddling in Wikipedia. Then for showoff by throwing the Wiki rule pages at them to make you appear important and create the impression of following the rules, while deliberately violating them. Not one, but multiple ones at impunity. Deliberately hiding behind the protective wall that even complaining about Admins is hidden behind and rarely accessible to the contributors. Nor you respect free speech nor you respect rules in Wikipedia. Rules are deliberately twisted and used at the whims of the Admins like yourself. You did many wrong things. usually a person is warned if there is a rule being broken and that was issued to me. Fine. But after that you got uppity when you got called out for violating the rule and blocking me. Rampant misuse of Admin privilege's that makes you nor worthy of an Administrator but more a violator of the same rules that you are quoting. Second on point it out you did the usual Wiki Admin thing of removing people for questioning the misuse of Admin rights. Sabkdada (talk) 03:29, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The only person who violated the rules was you. Please read WP:FREESPEECH, and then WP:ECR, specifically point A1, which you were warned about, violated, were blocked for, and then once that block expired returned to violate again while also violating WP:CIVIL. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 08:44, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]