User talk:Vishal Kandasamy

June 2021

Hello, I'm 245CMR. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Tulsi in Hinduism, 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 the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. .245CMR.•^👥📜 15:52, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Vishal Kandasamy. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Tulsi in Hinduism, 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 the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Vishal Kandasamy (talk) 14:16, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Brahma. 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. Note: Agni, Himavan, Rudra, Kamadeva are considered his children in the Puranas with Sarasvati as their mother. Also the sources mention them..245CMR.•^👥📜 12:17, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Brahma. 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.

Note: Himavan and Kamadeva are considered his children in the Puranas with Sarasvati as their mother but Agni and Rudra are the children of Aditi and Kashyapa in the Puranas. Also the sources mention them as the children these respective deities. Vishal Kandasamy (talk) 14:20, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have read from the Puranas that Agni and Rudra are Kashyapa and Aditi's sons and Kamadeva and Himavan are Brahma and Sarasvati's sons, so don't try to fool me. Vishal Kandasamy (talk) 13:16, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have read from the Puarnas that Agni and Rudra are the children of Aditi and Kashyapa and Kamadeva and Himavan are the children of Brahma and Sarasvati, so I removed them from the list and Wikipedia itself now accepted my version and added my version to that article Brahma now, so now you lost and i won. Vishal Kandasamy (talk) 03:23, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It is clearly said in the Puranas that only Kamadeva and Himavan are the biological children of Brahma and Sarasvati and not Agni and Rudra, who were the biological children of Aditi and Kashyapa and i added that and Wikipedia itself accepted my version added that to the article Brahma now, so you lost and i won now, so go away from here now itself. Vishal Kandasamy (talk) 05:14, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Parameshti

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Parameshti requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. 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. Clog Wolf _Howl 05:21, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have just now completely enlargened and corrected that Parameshti article after it was not deleted and Ingratis redirected it to Prajapati by studying it on Wisdomlib and everyone is perfectly seeing it now! Vishal Kandasamy (talk) 12:42, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Vishal Kandasamy, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits did not conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may have been removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations verified in reliable, reputable print or online sources or in other reliable media. Always provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to The Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Introduction tutorial
Contributing to Wikipedia
How to edit a page
Help pages
Simplified Manual of Style
Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need personal help ask me on my talk page, or ask a question on your talk page. Again, welcome. Venkat TL (talk) 07:57, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have studied the information I know about Kartikeya so I edited that and now, Wikipedia itself has accepted my version and added my version to that article Kartikeya now and I added that back to that article and Wikipedia also added it now, so I won and you lost now! Vishal Kandasamy (talk) 12:43, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

October 2021

Hello, I'm Venkat TL. I noticed that you recently removed content from Kartikeya without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. 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. Venkat TL (talk) 07:22, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed content from Kartikeya because in his wives section, extra information about Valli and Devasena is given. I edited them out and replaced the correct information. Vishal Kandasamy (talk) 07:25, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Vishal Kandasamy, that info is not worthless. Why did you remove? Venkat TL (talk) 07:33, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I kept Valli and Devasena information in the Kartikeya page only. I deleted only the marital status variation and only Valli or only Devasena is his wife in that information because that interferes with the truth. Vishal Kandasamy (talk) 07:42, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am not understanding what you are trying to say. Can you please explain this in more detail on this page by clicking this link? Venkat TL (talk) 07:56, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am saying that in some areas of India, Kartikeya is rumoured to be celibate and in some areas, he is said to be married to only Devasena or Valli. But, the truth is, he is married to both Valli and Devasena and he's a married man and not a celibate and not married to only Devasena or Valli. Vishal Kandasamy (talk) 08:03, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Now I understood. The truth is according to whom? Venkat TL (talk) 08:04, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The truth is Kartikeya has two wives, Valli and Devasena, and not one wife and he is not celibate. Vishal Kandasamy (talk) 11:34, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Did Lord Skanda personally told you the truth? Venkat TL (talk) 11:44, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lord Skanda told all Hindus about this in the Puranas Stutus etc. Vishal Kandasamy (talk) 11:54, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Strutis not stutus Vishal Kandasamy (talk) 11:54, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Those are written by humans. Please read Wikipedia Verifiability first. Venkat TL (talk) 12:01, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rishis have heard it from gods and wrote it down as Puranas and Vedas, then transmitted to humans. So, all of this is real and that's why I edited it all in the first place. Vishal Kandasamy (talk) 12:40, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Problem here is that there conflicting information from Puranas and Vedas. In this case some are saying 2 wives, while other puranas are saying 1 wive. So both is mentioned along with the source. Please do not remove it again. Venkat TL (talk) 12:43, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

But anyway we should find which is true. Since both Valli and Devasena, daughters of Vishnu through Lakshmi and Indra through Indrani are said to be married to Skanda, that means he has two wives and in modern days, he is shown as having two wives in all statues, paintings, etc and they are said to be this. Valli is said to be iccha shakti and Devasena is said to be kriya shakti and Skanda is said to be jnana shakti so this makes three people, or Skanda with both Valli and Devasena as his consorts. So, this says that he has two wives. Vishal Kandasamy (talk) 12:56, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Neither me nor you are qualified to find out the truth. At best we can quote a qualified author and mention that this qualified expert said so and so. That is what was mentioned, and you are asked to not remove it. Please click and read this page "Verifiability, not truth" Venkat TL (talk) 13:30, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know any qualified authors Vishal Kandasamy (talk) 14:07, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Have you read The two pages I shared, i.e. Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth and Wikipedia:Verifiability? Please confirm. Venkat TL (talk) 16:30, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It says that we need a reliable source Vishal Kandasamy (talk) 16:38, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

yes. and you can read Wikipedia:Verifiability#Reliable_sources to see What counts as a reliable source. Venkat TL (talk) 16:43, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I will find a reliable source Vishal Kandasamy (talk) 17:23, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes please. The things that are in that article were added along with a reliable source. So it is wrong to remove them without a reliable source. This is the reason why I had restored the lines you removed. I hope now you understand. Venkat TL (talk) 17:39, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. 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 Human body, you may be blocked from editing. Notfrompedro (talk) 13:15, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary, as you did at Human body. Notfrompedro (talk) 13:18, 7 October 2021 (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 Varaha. Venkat TL (talk) 13:14, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Varaha only rised earth from the primordial waters and give it to Brahma, since Brahma created beings but he couldn't place them anywhere, he wanted earth itself to place them on top, and after varaha rised the entire earth, Brahma placed his created beings on top of it, so I am correct only. Vishal Kandasamy (talk) 13:19, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

says who? Venkat TL (talk) 13:26, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Bhagavata Purana. Vishal Kandasamy (talk) 13:28, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tell me the publisher name and page number of the book. Also need the editor name. Venkat TL (talk) 14:33, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Roshan Dalal. There was no publisher name and page number of the book given. Vishal Kandasamy (talk) 14:54, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why would Brahma want the earth itself and he would tell Varaha to find it, if he doesn't want to put his created living beings on top of the earth? No. Since he needed the earth in order to keep his living beings in it so that's why for him, Varaha rised the earth from the primordial waters and gave it to Brahma and thus Brahma kept the created living beings on the earth. I am telling this only. Vishal Kandasamy (talk) 14:58, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's why I am correct. Vishal Kandasamy (talk) 15:03, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please share the link of the book, from where you are reading. Click this link and read -> WP:V Venkat TL (talk) 15:57, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You should understand the logic. Vishal Kandasamy (talk) 13:50, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Vishal Kandasamy, I understand, but even then you have to provide the links as reference/citation when making edits. If you do not give citation, then someone else will remove your edits. Read Wikipedia:Verifiability . Venkat TL (talk) 16:14, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bhagavata Purana mentions that Vishnu as Varaha came to help Brahma and Shiva create the universe more developedly and went it was under the cosmic ocean, he took it on his tusks and gave it to them in the universe and after that, they created all living beings on it and it is the full story here. Because that's what ultimately happened, so I wrote it and removed all other wrong edits here. Now as someone who edits Wikipedia in Hindu mythology, you don't even know Varaha's story and still don't understand it and without researching it at all, you are arguing wrongly with me and now lost as I restored my edits to Varaha and so stop your waste arguments here now. Vishal Kandasamy (talk) 17:06, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

May 2024

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia.
Hi! You have already been warned multiple times on disruptive edits to the same article Kartikeya, which you seem to be hell bent on repeating after three years. This will be your last warning and any further edits will lead to appropriate action. Thanks! Magentic Manifestations (talk) 16:57, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That article Kartikeya contains the very explicit mistake of Kartikeya being a bachelor and a misogynist when it is already mentioned in the Mahabharata itself that Kartikeya already married Devasena and they gave birth to many children, so i removed that completely and all other mistakes and corrected and improved the article completely and therefore, it is perfectly appropriate only, so you should please revert your revert now itself. Vishal Kandasamy (talk) 14:00, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Parameshti

The article Parameshti has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unreferenced and based on the talk page will stay that way indefinitely

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Notfrompedro (talk) 13:23, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but Ingratis redirected it to Prajapati and i expanded and corrected that article already! Vishal Kandasamy (talk) 13:56, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirected

As an alternative to deletion I have redirected this page to a related article, until such time as acceptable references / sources can be provided. Ingratis (talk) 15:24, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, now that article Parameshti has been corrected and expanded by me completely now after Ingratis redirected it to Prajapati! Vishal Kandasamy (talk) 13:55, 22 May 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 Kandasamy (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 Kandasamy (talk) 13:54, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Self admitted block-evading sockpuppet. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 14:14, 22 May 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 Kandasamy (talk) 13:54, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There's no reason for you to have access to this talk page anymore. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 15:15, 22 May 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.