User talk:Kunal Gupta 425

January 2022

Hello, I'm KylieTastic. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Randeep Surjewala 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. KylieTastic (talk) 11:58, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Sharjeel Imam. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 13:52, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Asaram. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Arjayay (talk) 17:55, 26 February 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 Sharjeel Imam. - Arjayay (talk) 18:00, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Sharjeel Imam. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Edward-Woodrow (talk) 15:54, 19 March 2023 (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 read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Favonian (talk) 17:37, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]