User talk:Virat69

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

August 2025

[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Maratha–Portuguese War (1683–1684) have been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 06:39, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Maratha–Portuguese War (1683–1684). Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Padgriffin Griffin's Nest 08:47, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i didnt add my personal someone had added fake information plus half information at many areas i was just removing the fake info replacing it by real info and completeing those parts where only half information had been given Virat69 (talk) 17:27, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

September 2025

[edit]

Information icon Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Persecution of Muslims. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. StephenMacky1 (talk) 17:50, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Vivek Agnihotri, you may be blocked from editing.
Your edits have been automatically marked as vandalism and have been automatically reverted. The following is the log entry regarding this vandalism: Vivek Agnihotri was changed by Virat69 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.850389 on 2025-09-08T13:37:06+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 13:37, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

why i have cited proper sources before changing how cna u say its vandalism Virat69 (talk) 05:21, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Hindu Mahasabha

[edit]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Hindu Mahasabha, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

  • A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 06:47, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

September 2025

[edit]

Warning icon Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at List of countries with the most skyscrapers, you may be blocked from editing. Cyrobyte (talk) 17:17, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

what are u talking i added with source and citations u guys are not updating the info and those who upadtes u remove see i put proper citations there and the number of skyscrappers in india have largely increased to 361 , where city of mumbai itself has 260 , i just updated with citations, im indian too i know more , i dont know if u hate india that u couldnt see the citations i mentioned, i request boss let me update and show real info with truth and proper citations and sources , the citations have been from number of skyscrappers in india that wikipage only Virat69 (talk) 16:28, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
hi sir im extremely sorry for my previous reply i was in a sad mood extremely sorry for the previous really i apologise, i have now given all the proper citations and proper sources , about 260 skyscrappers in mumbai from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_in_Mumbai
and from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_in_India#Cities_with_the_most_skyscrapers
the source of 361 skyscrappers , i hope u are satisfied , and again sorry for my previous rude reply. Virat69 (talk) 16:43, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Warning icon Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to 1999 Indian general election, you may be blocked from editing. – LuniZunie ツ(talk) 17:15, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

hi i havent done disruptive editting im myself an indian and i just wrote the reality there. Congress party is viewed as anti hindu party in india due to its extreme muslim appeasement and its leaders involved in anti hindu activties and giving hinduphobic statements. Are u an Indian ??? . If u are not and u dont know about indian politics u must not revert it please. Virat69 (talk) 17:25, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

October 2025

[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Religious violence in Odisha have been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 14:24, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon Please do not add or change content, as you did at Religious violence in Odisha, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources to see how to add references to an article. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 11:13, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i guess that information that vhp members were arrested is fake information spread by a news media called telegraph in reality nothing such happened Virat69 (talk) 11:32, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon Hi Virat69! I noticed that you recently made an edit at PAF Base Bholari and marked it as "minor", but it may not have been. On Wikipedia, "minor edit" refers only to superficial edits that could never be disputed, such as fixing typos or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not minor, even if it only concerns a single word. there is a pattern in your edits and you have misused the minor edit check box to WP:PUSH a WP:POV at PAF Base Rafiqui PAF Base Shahbaz and many other articles. The scale of it s so large that I am afraid the only choice to correct them is reverting them back. please refrain from mussing this in future or will report to WP:ANI -𝘼𝓷𝓳𝓪𝓷𝓐 𝙇𝓪𝓻𝙠𝓐 𝔱𝔞𝔩𝔨 12:07, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon Please do not add or change content, as you did at The Caravan, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources to see how to add references to an article. Thank you. Kautilya3 (talk) 12:12, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Stop icon You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Huddersfield sex abuse ring. Hzh (talk) 13:10, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Edit war

[edit]

Stop icon Your recent editing history at 2025 Afghanistan–Pakistan conflict shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. An edit war occurs when two or more users begin repeatedly reverting content on a page in a back-and-forth fashion to restore it back to how they think it should be, despite knowing that other editors disagree with their changes. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or undo the edits made by other editors when your changes are reverted. Instead, please use the talk page to work toward creating a version of the page that represents consensus among the editors involved. The best practice at this time is to stop editing the page and to discuss the disagreements, issues, and concerns at-hand with the other editors involved in the dispute. Wikipedia provides a page that helps to detail how this is accomplished. If discussions reach an impasse, you can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard, or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection while a discussion to resolve the dispute is ongoing.

Being involved in an edit war can result in being blocked from editing—especially as the page in question is currently under restrictions from the Arbitration Committee, if you violate the one-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than one revert on a single page with active Arbitration Committee restrictions 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 one-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the one-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Stop edit wars. 07:41, 12 October 2025 (UTC)

Stop it

[edit]

If you continue to make disruptive edits on the 2025 Afghanistan–Pakistan conflict or the Afghanistan–Pakistan clashes (2024–present) and continue to edit war and WP:POVPUSH without a talk page consensus, I will be forced to make an ANI on you or report you to an Admin. Please refrain and desist while you still can. KashanAbbas (talk) 07:52, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

u have written it completely biased against afghanistan and complete pro pakistan half of the information is completely fake even fact checking sistes have fact chekced and proved it while the ones which i gave i had given them with proper citations u are writing completely biased Virat69 (talk) 05:05, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The Tirah valley airstrike had nothing to do with this conflict, and Afghanistan doesn't have an air force and the image provided of the crashed Pakistani aircraft was AI-generated. I suggest that you desist while you still can. KashanAbbas (talk) 06:05, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
ok bro i wont edit page again i guess the page has been made neutral representing both the sides equally that was my only concern.Sorry for any wrong information by me if any , the aircraft crash had been reported by some media outlet Virat69 (talk) 06:27, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Virat69 It's fine. Stuff like this happens when you are a new editor. Don't feel discouraged though. You will improve in the future. Besides, considering the protection level of the article being raised, you likely won't be able to edit it again for a while and by the time you do, the conflict and public interest in it would have died down. KashanAbbas (talk) 16:27, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

[edit]

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:

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.

— EarthDude (Talk) 06:44, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

About your edits on 2025 Asia Cup

[edit]

Hey, I noticed your recent edits on the 2025 Asia Cup page. You are adding stuff that looks one-sided and not neutral, like calling someone theif, egoistic or adding claims based on social media takes. Wikipedia isn't the place for that kind of language or bias, everything needs to come from neutral and reliable sources. Have a look at WP:NPOV and WP:RS.

Also, you have been marking those edits as minor, which they clearly aren't. That box is only for small fixes like typos or formatting. Using it for big or controversial changes can be misleading, see WP:MINOR. -𝘼𝓷𝓳𝓪𝓷𝓐 𝙇𝓪𝓻𝙠𝓐 𝔱𝔞𝔩𝔨 08:16, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

stating facts is not being biased see all that was broadcasted live and even people have later put vedios broadcasted it live on social media where is the bias i just wrote exactly as it happened by removing that instead u are being biased and pro to pakistan and anti to india , i just made the content neutral and as per facts and even gave citations Virat69 (talk) 09:17, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vinayak Damodar Savarkar

[edit]

Information icon Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Vinayak Damodar Savarkar. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Jay8g [V•T•E] 19:33, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

October 2025

[edit]
Stop icon
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 ~~~~}}.  Doug Weller talk 19:45, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
why did u block me pls unblock me , i just removed misinformations, and wrote the correct info with proper citations , i always mentioned citations , why am i being blocked for no reason Virat69 (talk) 06:10, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]