User talk:Kharavela Deva

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Liance was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Anuvadi Svara and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

~Liance^talk 17:29, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Kharavela Deva! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! ~Liancetalk 17:29, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Kharavela Deva, welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Liance, and I've been editing here for a while. I wanted to thank you for submitting Draft:Anuvadi Svara to WikiProject Articles for Creation and helping to grow the encyclopedia! We appreciate your contributions and hope you stick around. I can see you've already started writing draft articles, so here are a few more resources that might be helpful:

• The Teahouse - ask Wikipedians for general editing help
• Articles for Creation Help Desk - ask reviewers for draft article help
• Creating your first article
• Referencing for beginners
• Wikipedia Manual of Style

I highly recommend visiting The Teahouse if you are unsure about anything Wiki related. It's a place where experienced editors answer questions and assist newcomers in the editing process. In addition, please do not hesitate to reach out on my talk page if you have any specific questions. Once again, welcome! I hope you enjoy your time here. ~Liance^talk 17:30, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Thilsebatti was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Anuvadi Svara and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Thilsebatti (talk) 16:29, 25 October 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).

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

---

Request reason:

I am an innocent victim who has been unjustly targeted. Throughout my interactions with Wikipedia, I have consistently adhered to the platform's policies and guidelines. In fact, my efforts have been focused on combating misinformation and promoting accountability, particularly with regards to media outlets that engage in malicious practices and harass innocent individuals, resulting in unwarranted account blocks.I respectfully request that my block be reviewed, and I implore the relevant authorities to take appropriate action to rectify this situation.Kharavela Deva (talk) 14:27, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You've edited other pages subsequent to making this request, so you are not affected by a block. 331dot (talk) 09:10, 30 November 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.

This account does not appear to be blocked. Are you able to edit the sandbox? --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 16:07, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can't Kharavela Deva (talk) 03:13, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have edited other pages after making your request, so you aren't affected by a block. Are you trying to edit an article or page that is protected? 331dot (talk) 09:11, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It could be a Wikipedia bug, that was affecting me the last night (according to India). I was trying to edit a page on a Indian television series. When I was trying to edit, a disclaimer was written on that page, 'Blocked by Michelle for 10 months and reason proxy abuse' Kharavela Deva (talk) 10:56, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Jiffles1. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Bhavishya Malika Puran, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Jiffles1 (talk) 04:05, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that you had created Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Kharavela Deva. I appreciate the eagerness and willingness to help. But I wanted to advise you that Wikipedians generally look for a certain level of experience before granting adminship. I noticed in your request page, you stated that your purpose is to ensure accurate and neutral information on Wikipedia. A very laudable purpose indeed. You can work toward this goal prior to gaining the administrator toolset. I would recommend sticking around for awhile and logging a few thousand edits before requesting adminship. If you have any questions, feel free to ask. Useight (talk) 17:09, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for admiring my work and guiding me. Regards, Ved Sharma  Kharavela Deva (talk) 08:04, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Anuvadi Svara, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Yaman and Vadi. 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) 19:54, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One of your recent edits has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for information on how to contribute your work appropriately. For legal reasons, Wikipedia strictly cannot host copyrighted text or images from print media or digital platforms without an appropriate and verifiable license. Contributions infringing on copyright will be removed. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. Bobby Cohn (talk) 13:55, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove copyright templates from articles, as you did with Anuvadi Svara. Your action has been reverted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept non-free text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted, and removing copyright notices will not help your case. You can properly contest the issue at Wikipedia:Copyright problems. If you are the owner of the material, you may release the material under the Creative Commons and GFDL licenses, as detailed at WP:IOWN. Alternatively, you are welcome to create a draft in your own words at Talk:Anuvadi Svara/Temp. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators and/or removers of the copyright notice templates will be blocked from editing. Bobby Cohn (talk) 16:18, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove an Articles for deletion notice or a comment from an AfD discussion, as you did at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anuvadi Svara. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 11:49, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Kharavela. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. .

Please do not add fictional images you have created yourself. bonadea contributions talk 10:43, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a courtesy note to let you know that I've undone your draftification of Bhavishya Malika Puran, as the article was older than 90 days and therefore ineligible to be draftified, per WP:DRAFTNO. I make no statement on the merits of the article, just that if you want it deleted, it will need to be brought to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion.

Thank you, Bobby Cohn (talk) 16:31, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Anuvadi Svara 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/Anuvadi Svara 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 until the discussion has finished.

🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 11:36, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Moving an article to draft to seek to avoid an AfD discussion in not appropriate. However, it would have ended up there anyway (0.9 probability). This is now the second time you have made an inappropriate move to draft space, and the behaviour is starting to become tiresome. Please think hard before you move things around. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 11:45, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's my whole Wikipedia journey first contribution. It took 7 months to be published, As a musician, I filled every requirements of a article; like References,footnotes, External links,Formatting etc. but, User:Bobby Cohn deleted it in, the name of 'Unsourced' Kharavela Deva (talk) 11:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What matters is verification by significant coverage in independent reliable sources. Please find those sources. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 13:17, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Kharavela Deva, is it your intent to use the time in the draft space to improve the article? If it is, I think you can just say as much in the deletion discussion and we can save you and other editors time. All this would entail is affirmatively saying that you are okay with moving the draft back and that you plan to work on it, and that's inline with what @Timtrent proposed when he nominated it. The problem with moving it yourself and then removing the AfD notification template without mentioning it elsewhere is that it tends to raise eyebrows around here, and we Wikipedians have a tendency to like following policy and established procedures.

If so—and to further explain some of the problems with the article to date—I think the draft could be improved by summarising what secondary sources say about the topic, and be sure to do so in your own words. And when you add content, cite to the material using inline citations, you can find an explanation for such at Help:Referencing for beginners. If it's in your own words, and its properly cited, this will prevent the text from being deleted. Take a look at Help:Your first article, and see what we typically look for in articles, that is notability (in the Wikipedia sense of the term, explained at WP:Notability) and a proper article (i.e.: something that isn't precluded by WP:NOT).

As for some of the earlier content, Wikipedia cannot host copyrighted content and that's the reason it was deleted and removed from the page history.

If you have any other questions, I would be more than happy to explain or give you some guidance. Alternatively if you want a different opinion or a set of eyes on a question you have, you can request help by placing a {{help me}} template with a question in a new section on your talk page and someone who monitors that from a different team will be by to help you.

Kindly, Bobby Cohn (talk) 14:34, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It has been returned to Draft:Anuvadi Svara by consensus. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 06:52, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on User Odia-2 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:56, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Ved Sharma. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and you may have a possible Conflict of Interest. 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 for review" button at the top of the page. bonadea contributions talk 10:33, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Aniruddhacharya, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Das.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:54, 2 January 2025 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

I am an innocent victim who has been unjustly targeted. Throughout my interactions with Wikipedia, I have consistently adhered to the platform's policies and guidelines. In fact, my efforts have been focused on combating misinformation and promoting accountability, particularly with regards to media outlets that engage in malicious practices and harass innocent individuals, resulting in unwarranted account blocks.I respectfully request that my block be reviewed, and I implore the relevant authorities to take appropriate action to rectify this situation.Cleared fact:- I was blocked by User:HJ Mitchell, giving a reason of proxy abuse. Regards,Ved Sharma (talk) 15:11, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Addressed via UTRS appeal #98750. voorts (talk/contributions) 23:48, 5 January 2025 (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.

Regards,Ved Sharma (talk) 15:11, 5 January 2025 (UTC)}} If it's a proxy block, you aren't being "targeted". You'll need to tell us the IP address involved if you want this reviewed; if you don't want to post it publicly, you may use WP:UTRS to provide it privately. If you are using a mobile device to edit, it's possible it's others at your location using a proxy. 331dot (talk) 15:15, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am using a mobile device. So what does that mean?Regards,Ved Sharma (talk) 15:18, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are several reasons that you could be subjected to such a block. It could be the network at your physical location; it could be someone else on your network. You successfully edited yesterday; is something different about your circumstances today than yesterday?(I don't need to know what) 331dot (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have appealed through WP:UTRS and I have complaint that any other user is maliciously using my IP Address to edit. Regards,Ved Sharma (talk) 15:31, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Shaktimaan Trilogy. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because No sign of it meeting WP:NFF. The sources are press releases with vague information.. 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 for review" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. bonadea contributions talk 16:52, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Vikramaditya Empire, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Prayag.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:57, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Vikramaditya Empire, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vikramaditya Empire until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I do not want to present my opinion in any form because when I nominated Bhavisya Malika as it contain no reliable source to cover the topic and just coverage. I did my best to argue but no one agreed and I also suggested there to add a "Mythical" or "No-Reliable proof" para but no actions was taken. So I didn't want to present any argument over the deletion of my page. Thanking you Regards,Ved Sharma (talk) 13:03, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kalhana, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kashmiri.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:52, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Durlabhavardhana I. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources. 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 for review" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. FULBERT (talk) 10:52, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Garudam. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Gupta Empire, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. – Garuda ^Talk! 16:22, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Vikramaditya Empire, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kalinga.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:53, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Vikramaditya Empire requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, such as at Articles for deletion. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Koshuri ^(グ) 08:18, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did at Draft:Chapati Gamer, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Be careful not to remove Articles for Creation reviews or comments! bonadea contributions talk 15:54, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Draft:Chapati Gamer, you may be blocked from editing. bonadea contributions talk 13:20, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are suspected of sockpuppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, then, if you wish to do so, respond to the evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Farooqahmadbhat. Thank you. DrKay (talk) 15:48, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Kharavela Deva, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Kharavela Deva and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Kharavela Deva during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. it's lio! | talk | work 16:44, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Farooqahmadbhat per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Farooqahmadbhat. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

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 Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 00:53, 30 March 2025 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

I am an innocent victim who has been unjustly targeted. Throughout my interactions with Wikipedia, I have consistently adhered to the platform's policies and guidelines. In fact, my efforts have been focused on combating misinformation and promoting accountability, particularly with regards to media outlets that engage in malicious practices and harass innocent individuals, resulting in unwarranted account blocks.I respectfully request that my block be reviewed, and I implore the relevant authorities to take appropriate action to rectify this situation. And if you are really want me to be blocked, kindly provide some proof.

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only. This unblock request has been open for more than two weeks but has not proven sufficient for any reviewing administrator to take action, or you have not responded to questions raised during that time. You are welcome to request a new block review if you substantially reword your request. 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) 14:56, 8 May 2025 (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.

(Non-administrator comment) You have copy-pasted a previous unblock request and added an extra sentence, which does not help demonstrate understanding. Also, evidence that led to the block can be found here. CheckUsers are not allowed to share technical evidence for privacy reasons (e.g. technical evidence can reveal where you live), but behavioural evidence is visible. Best regards, QwertyForest (talk) 07:59, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I really want to know, that no investigations are done as the last comment was by a

This seems to be completely different that one says is a Kashmiri Muslim on the other hand the other one says Odia living in Sweden. This seems to be completely different.

And after that no investigations are really done. I think, Wordsmith has unjustly blocked me without any evidence. I believe and keen to tell you that yes I have vandalised Wikipedia earlier by a account Vedsharma08213 but it comes under WP:GF but I made a new account inspiring from Raja Kharbel but it comes under WP:NS. Regards,Ved Sharma (talk) (contribs) 01:37, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Kharavela Deva, you can't do a WP:NS when you're blocked. You have to appeal the block on the earlier account first. Can you please list all of the accounts you have used previously? -- asilvering (talk) 02:05, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Vedsharmaisop that's it. And I restarted using Wikipedia again as a WP:FCS Regards,Ved Sharma (talk) (contribs) 13:22, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, what I'm saying is that you cannot restart as a clean start while one of your accounts is blocked. We can resolve this, but we need to know what you were originally blocked for. I think you're still missing at least one account. What account are you talking about in this edit? -- asilvering (talk) 19:13, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In that edit, you say I joined Wikipedia 10 years ago. What account did you use then? -- asilvering (talk) 11:51, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In which edit Mr. asilvering? Regards,Ved Sharma (talk) (contribs) 12:39, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have defined that I am not related to Vedsharma08213 😊 Regards,Ved Sharma (talk) (contribs) 12:40, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I... what? You've already said that is one of your accounts.

The edit I was referring to is this one: [1]. -- asilvering (talk) 12:41, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That was a typo. As I have a similar named id on Twitch that's why I was confused. But the account User:Vedsharmaisop was blocked 2 years before. Regards,Ved Sharma (talk) (contribs) 11:44, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't done anything incorrect so why I will apologise? Regards,Ved Sharma (talk) (contribs) 13:13, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Kharavela Deva, you haven't answered my earlier question about the edit in which you say you joined wikipedia 10 years ago. -- asilvering (talk) 20:42, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i told that that isn't my account Regards,Ved Sharma (talk) (contribs) 02:35, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Kharavela Deva. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Anuvadi Svara, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 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) 09:08, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Kharavela Deva. This message concerns the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Anuvadi Svara".

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 by following the instructions here. 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) 20:29, 16 June 2025 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

I am an innocent person who has been unfairly blocked. Kindly, yay I have always followed Wikipedia's rules and policies when using the site. Actually, I've been working to fight false information and hold people accountable, especially when it comes to media outlets that do bad things and harass innocent people, which leads to account blocks that aren't necessary.I would like my block to be looked at again, and I urge the appropriate authorities to do what needs to be done to fix this. And if you really want me to be blocked, please give me some prooves.

Decline reason:

This is a substantial duplication of your previous 3 unblock requests. There is also no effort to engage with the direct questions asked above or to engage directly with the specific concerns which led to the finding of probable sockpuppetry. In view of the repetitive and disruptive nature of the post-block talk page use, I will also be revoking your talk page access. Arcticocean ■ 20:45, 2 July 2025 (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.

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 posting of this notice.

Arcticocean ■ 20:47, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Kharavela Deva. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Shaktimaan Trilogy, 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) 11:06, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Kharavela Deva. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Ved Sharma, 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) 11:06, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]