Recondyte

CS1 error on Secret Superstar

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

• A bare URL and 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) 14:20, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

CS1 error on Godzilla (2014 film)

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Godzilla (2014 film), may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A bare URL and 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) 20:10, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

CS1 error on Dangal (2016 film)

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Dangal (2016 film), 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) 20:41, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

WP:ICTFMOS

Hi! Please read the guidelines mentioned in WP:ICTFMOS. Sid95Q (talk) 23:55, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

October 2025

Hello, I'm Fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four. I wanted to let you know that I removed one or more external links you added to the main body of Dharampal Satyapal Group. Generally, any relevant external links should be listed in an "External links" section at the end of the article and meet the external links guidelines. Links within the body of an article should be internal wikilinks. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four (talk) 21:24, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Vanjari caste, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources to see how to add references to an article. Thank you. Ekdalian (talk) 17:23, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

As mentioned in my edit summary, most of the sources cited are unreliable! Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 17:24, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

Majority of the topics edited had correct citations (Especially government gazetteers). You mentioned unreliable sources.... Which was unreliable can you name one..?

Durga devi's reference was correct. Every other edit was thoroughly checked.

Please mention on what basis did you revert the edit...?! Recondyte (talk) 18:13, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Vanjari caste, you may be blocked from editing. Discuss on the article talk page and achieve consensus first instead of engaging in edit warring. Ekdalian (talk) 18:52, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

sure. Recondyte (talk) 18:56, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics: minimum 500 edits / extended confirmed right required for caste and related articles

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:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

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.

Ekdalian (talk) 17:32, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Blocked for sockpuppetry

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Recondyte. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

---

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 think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

---

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

asilvering (talk) 12:36, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

{{unblock| Please let me be a part of Wikipedia. Contributing is one of the things that keeps my depression and loneliness at bay.

If necessary I will delete all the other accounts What should I do to remedy this situation please guide me@Yamla what should I do now bro..!?.}} Recondyte (talk) 15:27, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

Unblock unblock | reason=Please reconsider

Hello @Asilvering

I had created different accounts to address different topics from them. (for e.g History from One, Community groups and science from other)

I have no intention to abuse or vandalize any information on Wikipedia.

Please let me be a part of Wikipedia. Contributing is one of the things that keeps my depression and loneliness at bay.

If necessary I will delete all the other accounts.

I solemnly promise not to abuse any rules of Wikipedia or create any account.

Yours sincerely,

Recondyte.

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).

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

---

Request reason:

Hello @asilvering. I had created different accounts to address different topics from them. (for e.g History from One, Community groups and science from other) I have no intention to abuse or vandalize any information on Wikipedia. Please let me be a part of wikipedia. Contribuitng is one of the things that keeps my depression at bay. If necessary I will delete all the other accounts. I solemnly promise not to abuse any rules of Wikipedia or create any account. Yours sincerely, Recondyte.

Decline reason:

One open unblock request at a time, please; you had two. This makes no sense at all. Why on earth would you think you needed separate accounts to do that? And it's not even true. This account and Exper-maelstrom have a substantial overlap in editing, sometimes only seconds apart. Yamla (talk) 10:51, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

---

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.

In the spirit of AGF, you might want consider editing at Simple English Wikipedia (providing you aren't blocked there).

There's something called the Standard offer, it's useful in cases where a significant breach of trust has occurred, such as sockpuppetry. This is a community project and trust is paramount, so you'll need to work hard to rebuild it.

With the Standard offer, you must go for at least six months without touching English Wikipedia. No new accounts, no logged-out editing, nothing.

However, that doesn't mean that you have to completely stop editing Wikipedia projects. Simple English Wikipedia is very similar to English Wikipedia, except it's simplified - that means it's a good place to learn the fundamentals and build up a history of productive editing.

You can then come back here in six months or so (the longer, the better) and submit a new appeal with proof that you can be an asset to Wikipedia from Simple. It won't be easy or quick, but this way you can carry on editing and work towards a future appeal.

Just bear in mind that any edits here via any account, IP or temporary account will reset the minimum timer of six months. Blue Sonnet (talk) 18:47, 15 November 2025 (UTC)