User talk:Vishal Kandassamy

jpgordon𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇, it means that in these following above mentioned articles, other editors said that i vandalized and disrupted Wikipedia but in reality, i corrected and perfected all these following above mentioned articles and all of them are fully correct and accurate now, so none of them i disrupted and vandalized on Wikipedia and i corrected all of them perfectly on other so there are no problems now and that is why i want to be unblocked, so unblock me now itself. So unblock me now please.

June 2022

Hello, I'm Sumanuil. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Sulochana (wife of Indrajit) have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks. Sumanuil. 06:07, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Those changes are content and spelling mistakes in that article and that is why is corrected them. Now those corrected changes only are present in that article. Vishal Kandassamy (talk) 10:03, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Vishal Kandassamy! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia – it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. Dāsānudāsa (talk) 11:08, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Those are all grammar, word, spelling and content mistakes in those articles on Wikipedia so that is why i corrected them all and they are present there now. Vishal Kandassamy (talk) 10:04, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

December 2022

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Bharuch, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Lone-078 (talk) 18:08, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In that article for Bharuch, Gujarat, there are many spelling, word, grammar and content mistakes fully all over the article and that is why i corrected that article. Now you can fully correct all those mistakes in that article. Vishal Kandassamy (talk) 10:06, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

August 2023

Nearly all of your edits over the past year have been marked as minor, despite the advice given to you above in June 2022. Please only mark typo corrections and the removal of vandalism as minor. Thank you. Belbury (talk) 15:58, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There are many spelling, word, grammar and content mistakes fully in all those articles on Wikipedia that i have edited and corrected and those corrections and edits were not large at all and they all are tiny corrections,so that is why i marked all of them as minor edits only. Vishal Kandassamy (talk) 10:13, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I'm Belbury. Your recent edit(s) to the page Traditional Berber religion appear to have added incorrect information, so they have been reverted for now. If you believe the information you added 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 your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. You should not edit the text of direct quotations. Belbury (talk) 15:03, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All those edits to Traditional Berber Religion were all actually correct because they have all corrected all the spelling, grammar, word and content mistakes present fully throughout the article only and not vandalism at all and so i reverted them all back to my old edits itself and they are now present in that Wikipedia article. Vishal Kandassamy (talk) 10:21, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Traditional Berber religion, 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. Lone-078 (talk) 16:42, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The content in Traditional Berber Religion has many mistakes present fully throughout the entire article such as spelling, grammar, word and content mistakes everywhere, so i added and changed content in Traditional Berber Religion and corrected all the wrong mistakes in that one article fully and now it is fully correct without any mistakes now, so now know that correctly. Vishal Kandassamy (talk) 10:26, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This editor knowingly inserted fake text into quotations from Herodotus, as well as breaching MOS:ERA and introducing other errors, and now far from listening to other editors or admitting to their faults, boasts that the article is fully correct without any mistakes now. I've reverted those edits. NebY (talk) 13:11, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dear NebY, it is Ancient Canaanite religion and Greaco-Roman religion that influenced Traditional Berber religion and not Judaism and these religions were present with Ancient Berber religion also along with other religions in history and that Berber tribe's original name is Awjila tribe which was called Augilae tribe in Ancient Greek and Latin and the other tribe is Siwa with all dates in BCE and CE, not BC and AD everywhere as BCE and CE are now used commonly all over Wikipedia with that tomb is said in Greaco-Roman mythology as the tomb of the giant Antaeus only and the other tribe is the Massylii with the heavens (skies) and the words you, celestial, and Moon with and the also in the Massylii king's speech to Scipio and that sun god is Sol only and it's deities not gods anywhere with the words theorized and at least also included with the Egyptian God Set being also worshipped by the Berbers according to Herodotus himself as said by this same article above that quotation of Herodotus and the and it's common god and goddess together not god or goddess alone, with the words two, not, present, in and that is The Berber origin of Egyptian deities with the word believe and that is the Egyptian Goddess Amunet there and Osiris's home was Libya as said by Wallis Budge and Athena was born to Brontes and Metis at Chortt el Djerid (Lake Tritonis) in Tunisia, which is Ancient Libya and the date 480 BCE and the Carthaginian forces were killed by the Greeks in 480 BCE also with the words and goddess, respectively for Hera and Zeus with the Greeks winning against the Libyans at the Battle of Irassa in 570 BCE also it is the words shown, who has a short beard and hair, said, is, similar, and it is Massylii not Massyle and the Romans defeated and destroyed Carthage after killing the Carthaginian forces in 146 BCE and they incorporated the Massylii into their Roman Empire also fully and now, these are the correct content in this article and you removed these and made errors to Traditional Berber Religion article on Wikipedia and you are boasting to me that you have reverted them back to their correct content after you wrongly edited them, so you should not contradict yourself and revert these old edits above back now. Vishal Kandassamy (talk) 11:54, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at King of the gods, you may be blocked from editing. Belbury (talk) 10:40, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Belbury, the King and Queen of the deities article has a completely wrong, incorrect, erroneous and mistakeful lists and sections of content of the deities who are rulers of divine pantheons of deities in all world mythologies with many total mistakes and errors in content, grammar, word and spelling throughout the entire article and thus, i corrected them fully by removing all mistakes and correcting them all and then only that article was fully correct without any mistakes in it and you should correct all those mistakes fully now to keep that article fully correct and if errors like this are kept uncorrected and wrongly reverted by people like you, you and others should be blocked from editing by Wikipedia. Vishal Kandassamy (talk) 10:32, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Banteay Srei, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Vali and Kala. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 06:10, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I have already added the pages Vali (Ramayana) and Kirtimukha for Vali and Kala on Banteay Srei and you please restore all my edits on that article back now. Vishal Kandassamy (talk) 10:53, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

September 2023

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles. Your edits could be interpreted as vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use your sandbox. Thank you. Chronikhiles ^(talk) 07:19, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Chronikhiles, there are many spelling, word, grammar and content mistakes in the Wikipedia articles of Andal, Tiruppavai and Nachiyar Tirumoli entirely, so i corrected all those mistakes in it not vandalism at all. So you should restore all those all my edits to those articles now, please. Vishal Kandassamy (talk) 11:23, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Cosmic ocean, you may be blocked from editing. HistoryofIran (talk) 19:20, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dear HistoryofIran, at the Wikipedia article Cosmic ocean, the entire article is full of spelling, grammar, word and content mistakes fully and i corrected all of that and made that, article accurate and you are wrongly thinking that they are commentary and personal analysis in it and so, you should correct all of them now. Vishal Kandassamy (talk) 11:26, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Juno (mythology). You also inserted material contrary to the sources already cited and made inappropriate changes to the phrasing. NebY (talk) 10:54, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dear NebY, Juno (mythology)'s real mother is Ops and real father is Saturn in all of Greaco-Roman mythology, so i correctly added that and you are wrongly saying that it is poorly sourced or unsourced is also wrong in that article, so you should revert that edit back now and stop wrongly reverting accurate corrections to erroneous content on Wikipedia. Vishal Kandassamy (talk) 11:30, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Bhumi (goddess). HistoryofIran (talk) 13:09, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dear HistoryofIran, at the Wikipedia article Bhumi, it is wrongly mentioned that Bhumi's husband is Vishnu as Varaha while her real husband is Dyaus, the Hindu sky god and Vishnu's wife is Lakshmi only with Bhumi and Dyaus both are companions of Vishnu and Lakshmi in all of Hindu mythology and only Bhumi and Dyaus together gave birth to all their children and not with anyone else also with Vishnu as Varaha only killed Hiranyaksha and saved Bhumi and Dyaus together from him as Varaha, the third incarnation of Vishnu in the Dashavatara of Vishnu also and all this information is already present in Wikipedia itself in the

articles of Varaha, Dyaus (Akasha), Prithvi (Bhumi) and Hiranyaksha itself, so your saying that my edits are unsourced or poorly sourced content is wrong as they were taken from these articles on Wikipedia itself only and you should revert them all back to my edits now. Vishal Kandassamy (talk) 11:40, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Minor edits

Please do not mark your edits as "minor" when they add or remove content. See Help:Minor edit. Belbury (talk) 07:52, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have continued to mark your edits as minor. No edit described as "I added new content and corrected mistakes in this article" (a summary which does not explain or justify your edit) qualifies as minor. You need to stop doing that. NebY (talk) 10:51, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have only corrected the mistakes in the articles and not the entire articles themselves, so that's why i marked them all as minor edits for that reason only. You should know that well now. Vishal Kandassamy (talk) 11:55, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Belbury, all the articles you were saying are having many mistakes in their spelling, content, etc and i corrected them all only and not the entire page itself fully, so they are all minor edits only and you should know that well now. Vishal Kandassamy (talk) 11:43, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

September 2023

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

If you think 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 Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 13:59, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request

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).

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

Request reason:

Dear Wikipedia, i have edited Wikipedia to remove the mistakes present in the articles and to correct them only and i made them perfect without errors in content and spelling and other corrections and i have corrected many articles fully and all of them are very well many times. But this user has wrongly blocked me, so please unblock me now, so i would correct all mistakes in Wikipedia articles and make them fully accurate from mistakes.Vishal Kandassamy (talk) 06:18, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Since you don't seem to see how your editing was disruptive, there are no grounds to remove the block. We don't expect perfection; your edits did more damage than they were helpful. 331dot (talk) 08:41, 5 September 2023 (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.

Unblock Request

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).

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

Request reason:

First of all, I didn't want to disrupt and vandalize Wikipedia at all like these people wrongly said and I corrected the mentioned above pages in the talk page, the following articles of Juno (mythology), Sulochana (wife of Indrajita), Bharuch, Traditional Berber Religion, King of the Gods, Andal, Tiruppavai, Nachiyar Tirumoli, Cosmic Ocean, Bhumi, which all i edited out because they have mistakes all over their entire article's spellings, words, grammars, contents which made the entire articles totally wrong and removed them all as they are really obvious mistakes in correct articles and coreected them all to make them all correct now and i corrected them all over and all of them are now correct completely as i edited and coreected all of them now in other accounts and all of them are completely correct now and i just did that without any intention of vadalizing and disrupting Wikipedia and you can see my entire talk page and edit history to know that all the articles that i edited are correct now and these above mentioned articles are also completely correct without any errors and vandalism and disruption and adding false content which all i didn't do at all as said above and so i want to be unblocked now so that i can edit all articles on Wikipedia completely correct like all of them now and make the website correct now now itself after this long time ago. Vishal Kandassamy (talk) 16:34, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This is incomprehensible. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 18:19, 18 March 2024 (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.

Vishal Kandassamy (talk) 16:34, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock Request

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).

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

Request reason:

The following above articles that these editors called me i was wrongly editing them are all now correct only without any mistakes and errors as i edited them from other accounts on Wikipedia completely and all of them are correct now so i didn't corrupt them all and now all are correct as they contain no mistakes now, so i want to be unblocked now as all of them are correct without any problems and my entire edit history is correct now.Vishal Kandassamy (talk) 14:13, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

It's clear you lack sufficient competence to communicate in English. Please stick to your own native-language version of Wikipedia. Yamla (talk) 16:06, 23 March 2024 (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.

Unblock Request

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).

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

Request reason:

I have all sufficient competence to communicate in English and my unblock request is comprehensible only and i am not disrupting Wikipedia at all as all the articles that these editors claimed are disrupted by me are now totally correct now without any mistakes as i edited all of them from my other accounts and they never did any damage and are more helpful as all those articles i already corrected them from my other accounts and all of them are now completely correct without any mistakes now, so Wikipedia is made completely correct now without any disruptions and i want to be unblocked now itself so that i can edit and make Wikipedia correct now and English Wikipedia is my native language Wikipedia also.Vishal Kandassamy (talk) 16:48, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Since you don't think you have done anything wrong, there are no grounds to remove the block. Your English skill may be sufficient to get a message across, but not to edit this Wikipedia. There is nothing special about the English Wikipedia, it is not the premier Wikipedia. Please stick to the Wikipedia of your primary language. 331dot (talk) 12:57, 24 March 2024 (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.

You are not permitted to edit or remove declined unblock requests for your currently active block, as you did here. Do not do so again. --Yamla (talk) 16:58, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yamla, all the articles that i edited are now perfectly correct without any mistakes and not like what these editors claimed to be that i vandalized and disrupted them and so please unblock me now itself please. Vishal Kandassamy (talk) 19:18, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I want to be unblocked now itself so i can edit Wikipedia correctly now after all these articles are corrected by me in my other accounts and now i want to unblock please. Vishal Kandassamy (talk) 19:20, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I want to be unblocked from editing now. Vishal Kandassamy (talk) 19:20, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock me now please. Vishal Kandassamy (talk) 20:36, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yamla, I want to be unblocked please. Vishal Kandassamy (talk) 20:37, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You risk losing access to this talk page if you do not stop pestering Yamla. As Yamla already reviewed a request, he can't review another. I must agree with him that your English skill is insufficient to participate here. 331dot (talk) 22:59, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear 331dot, My English skill is sufficient to participate here and i am wrongly blocked for 6 months and all those errors in those articles are already corrected now with any errors by me and others, so i have no reason to be unblocked now. So at least now you unblock me without declining my unblock request please after six months. Vishal Kandassamy (talk) 05:54, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Don't decline my unblock request please, 331dot. Vishal Kandassamy (talk) 07:47, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All errors are corrected now by me and others so now there are no problems between me and others so i have no reason to be unblocked now so you 331dot unblock me now itself without not declining my request please after me being wrongly blocked for six months unfairly. I am unfairly blocked now. Vishal Kandassamy (talk) 07:49, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So someone please help me now. Vishal Kandassamy (talk) 07:51, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My English skill is sufficient to edit this Wikipedia only and the Wikipedia of my primary language is English only. So don't tell me again and again that i don't have English skill at all and since i did nothing wrong only i want to be unblocked now, 331dot. Vishal Kandassamy (talk) 13:50, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not seeing that. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:51, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock Request

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).

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

Request reason:

Hi admin, it's has been six months since I was blocked from editing on Wikipedia. I think I was blocked because I edited articles about Juno (mythology), Sulochana (wife of Indrajita), Bharuch, Traditional Berber Religion, King of the Gods, Andal, Tiruppavai, Nachiyar Tirumoli, Cosmic Ocean, Bhumi, in Hindu mythology and Greco-Roman mythology and World mythologies. My intention to edit the articles is not to vandalize or disrupt the articles, but to correct these articles and show them to the world. The articles are read by many people who read about Hindu mythology, Greco-Roman mythology, World mythologies and are popularly read by them. So I was shocked, why nobody corrects the articles about these mythologies. Even the other Hindu mythology, Greco-Roman mythology, World mythologies have correct articles on Wikipedia. Vishal Kandassamy (talk) 11:53, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only. You already have an open unblock request. Only one at a time, please. If you wish to remove your earlier unblock request and make a new one, you are free to do so. You are also free to modify your earlier open unblock request. But only ONE open request at a time, please. Yamla (talk) 11:55, 24 March 2024 (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.

You've already been told not to remove declined unblock requests. You did it again anyway. I think your use of this talk page is at an end. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 03:02, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

UTRS, email, evading block by IP editing

UTRS appeal #86645 & UTRS appeal #86694 have been declined. JBW (talk) 12:43, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS appeal #87582 is declined. User is in danger of losing UTRS access. --Yamla (talk) 12:15, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User is continuing to evade their block via WP:LOUTSOCK to continue editing inappropriately. --Yamla (talk) 12:14, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As predicted, UTRS access has been removed. Email access has also been removed, as a result of misuse. JBW (talk) 16:38, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]