User talk:Aroneasadas

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Aroneasadas, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

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 ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Kaizenify (talk) 00:32, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Important Notice[edit]

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 recently 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.

Vanamonde (Talk) 02:03, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 27[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2016 Kerala Legislative Assembly election, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Vengara (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 09:10, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 24[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2016 Kerala Legislative Assembly election, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Konni (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:49, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2020 elections in India moved to draftspace[edit]

An article you recently created, 2020 elections in India, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. It may also be too soon for this article to be written, since the elections are in over a year and haven't had much coverage. I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can develop the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 06:29, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 29[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2016 Kerala Legislative Assembly election, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page K. Surendran (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:16, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:2020 elections in India concern[edit]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:2020 elections in India, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:25, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:15, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reversion of edits to 2016 Kerala Legislative Assembly election[edit]

Hi User:Aroneasadas,

Thank you for taking interest in editing 2016 Kerala Legislative Assembly election!!

With regard to the reversion, I believe that the page talks about the 2016 election and its results. The inclusion of the party headed by Mr. P.C. George happened on a later date and did not happen in association with the actual results or soon after that. For instance, the seat share at present is 93-45 (LDF-UDF) as opposed to 91-47 soon after the election. In this case the article would reflect the initial standings (i.e., 91-47) and the updated seats (93-45) could be represented in articles relevant to that (Articles related to the by-elections, page on Kerala Legislative Assembly etc.). In the same vein, the point in question, in my opinion, should show P.C. George as an independent candidate, and may contain a note reflecting the developments that happened after the elections.

I encourage you to take a look at pages on other elections with similar situations (2011 Kerala Legislative Assembly election, where a candidate resigned and contested in the by-election with the opposing party's ticket, could be an example).

Cheers!!! (User talk:TheInnocentBystander) 1:19, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:2020 elections in India[edit]

Hello, Aroneasadas. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "2020 elections in India".

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.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! HasteurBot (talk) 03:00, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:30, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

March 2023[edit]

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to 2023 Karnataka Legislative Assembly election. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 21:42, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

April 2023[edit]

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 Performance of candidates from major alliances of the 2021 Kerala Legislative Assembly election, 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. Dhruv edits (talk) 16:25, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

July 2023[edit]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Performance of candidates from major alliances of the 2021 Kerala Legislative Assembly election, you may be blocked from editing. Dhruv edits (talk) 23:23, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:41, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Discretionary Sanctions Notice[edit]

You have recently made edits related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. This is a standard message to inform you that India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. - SUN EYE 1 16:01, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

February 2024[edit]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. 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:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
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. - SUN EYE 1 03:33, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

you keep your agendas to yourself. I do not have to tolerate your lies and deceit. You are the moron one who changes my edits to the way you like and trying to gaslight me. Why do not you block yourself and do world a favor . All of them are not subscribed to your dogmatic ideas and narrative setting Aroneasadas (talk) 06:11, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. - SUN EYE 1 13:22, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

so ? Aroneasadas (talk) 13:48, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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 ~~~~}}. Courcelles (talk) 18:18, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The history of personal attacks you have exhibited is utterly unacceptable here. Courcelles (talk) 18:20, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

you do not give any justification for your action for the charge "you are not here to build an encyclopedia.". . -

SUN EYE 1

Reverted my edits without any explanation or justification. why do not you ask him the reason for that first ?

2 . After he made a complaint(which is a replay for him by me for a personal message, not a public statement),

i improved my editing ways and started to provide better links and explanation

so thus even if my actions are "you are not here to build an encyclopedia"

i am willing to change and cable to understand and act in a manner that is beneficial for the whole world and for the humanity. why you think that people edit Wikipedia ??

i also stated that i am here for improving the Wikipedia (i am more than 12 y old wiki used with less than 500 edits, so you can see that i maake edits rarely and mostly minor ones )

the reasoning you provided for blocking is not based on clear evolution, evidence checking and based on a sound justification.

Your charge is on me is not applicable and your ways of imposing block is unjust and a nature of a bully

and you blocked me for indefinitely , no warning no temporary block nothing , it just total abuse of power

s

i would like to know the opinion of other editors, and do not abuse your power.

i have no problem with the block. if wiki not need my help so be it. Aroneasadas (talk) 18:39, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Opinion of other editors? Based on the ANI report, and the incivility above, I endorse the block. You're welcome.-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:25, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Opinion of other editors? Based on the ANI report, and the incivility above, I endorse the block. You're welcome.-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:25, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

why do not you see the logical fallacy in those things ?

he has no answer for his action why i have to give for mine only ?

its one-sided , he do not give any reason for reverting my edit

why do not you first tell that to him

1 i made an edit

2 he changed it

3 then i reverted (this happen 2 or 3 times )

4 he says its with our any explanation and disruptive edits

5 then accuse me of NOT HERE due to disruptive edits , personal attacks etc

6 Why do not you ask him why he made this edit (Special:diff/11209787884) and just saying clean up?

7.1 (Special:diff/209913534) you do not explain why he remove NDA candidates

So he deletes anything that not suit his point of view

after his complaint, I improve and provided links for my edits

"the incivility above, I endorse the block. You're welcome

You just made a statement. Without any reasoning

I can also state the same to you Aroneasadas (talk) 03:19, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

{{unblock

1. understand what you have been blocked for,

2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and

3. will make useful contributions instead.

1. I am blocked wrongly, editor not justified his action and reasoning is nonexistent.

2. After the complaint i do not cause any will not continue to cause damage or disruption

3. made useful contributions instead.

Then also they block me for infinitely

why do not tell him do not act like a bully and allow abusing the power as an editor

Aroneasadas (talk) 03:26, 29 February 2024 (UTC)}}[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

Administrators are accountable for their actions involving administrator tools, as unexplained administrator actions can demoralize other editors who lack such tools. Subject only to the bounds of civility, avoiding personal attacks, and reasonable good faith, editors are free to question or to criticize administrator actions. Administrators are expected to respond promptly and civilly to queries about their Wikipedia-related conduct and administrative actions, especially during community discussions on noticeboards or during Arbitration Committee proceedings. Administrators should justify their actions when requested. :SO THE CHARGE YOU PUT on me is the "personal attack" so not NOTHERE policy :1 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. - SUN EYE 1 03:33, 24 February 2024 (UTC) :This is a warning for me by SUN EYE , i made an edit he changed it (without any reason or explanation) so i revert to the original state (similar attempt made by others also ). Then he star accuse me of edit wars and a warning. i would like like to know what he did for the other users. :so what he did basically is happened is he act in manner thats suits him ( without using use the article's talk page - for reverting my edit). Thus abuse his power to push his agendas, dogmatic ideas and narrative setting. Then he pretends to be a good guy and give me a warning :so i STATE to him " you are the moron" (I TRY TO EXPLAIN TO HIM THAT HE IS THE ONE SHOULD FOLLOW THE RULES AND TO HAVE A TOLERANCE FOR VARIOUS VIEW POINTS). But he failed to understand the sarcasm and try to use the word as a weapon against me to show his power and privileges. I tried to point out the logical fallacy and wrongful actions of his. But he chose what he wanted and use against me for a material for complaint. : :i do not call him "you are a moron-which is a personal attack" so this charge is invalid and SUN EYE 1 is acted in bad faith. :2. Second one is something like -"" i can call you anti india and a pro terrorist"" :Here again this is not a personal attack i do not call anyone a terrorist or anti indian :i said i can call you , i do not call him :I just stated these words to help the other person to understand the views he put forward. :To explain it simply, he kind of said i stand on the right side so i said to him your views may stand in left side. :Here also i world like to know what action taken to the other user :So both these instances are invalid, thus the charges are not applicable to me :the one who put block act in bad faith. Or without thinking properly :a who uses personal attack use abusive languages frequently which is not the case here :these are cherry-picked examples against me. :So i strongly oppose this act of bullying and unlawful and use of power :Here my account given a warning and blocked indefinitely for the same "reason" :Courcelles is the one who did this :i believe this is a team up between these two :Even if the charges are real and valid :it should be a warning or temporary block not a warning + indefinite block :after he made a complaint, i improved my editing ways and provided links and explanation :for that single reason, you can't charge me with NOT HERE :i did thing things in good faith , do you ?? :YOUR ACTION IS LIKE BELIEVING that It's NIGHT EVEN AFTER THE SUN IS RISEN . :do not believe and live with your narrow views try to expand your views and accept others :correct your mistakes and improve yourself like me. :if you do not lift block its ok. :i do not have tolerate your bullying and abuse of power :Aroneasadas (talk) 20:06, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

WP:WALLOFTEXT. I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 20:20, 28 February 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.