Shashi.bindu

Welcome!

Some cookies to welcome you!

Welcome to Wikipedia, Mighty.ahirs! I am Illusion Flame and I am the volunteer who received your account request. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions check out Wikipedia:Questions, or feel free to leave me a message on my talk page or type {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• How to write a great article

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. Again, welcome! - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 02:56, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

January 2026

Hello, I'm Janan2025. I noticed that you recently made an edit to Ophir in which your edit summary ("Fixed typo") did not appear to describe the change you made. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Janan2025 (talk) 15:45, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Raghuvaṃśa (dynasty), without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources to see how to add references to an article. Thank you. ~ANM🐁 T·C 19:42, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

@Allninemice I having a lot of information related to this dynasty,the raghuvansham already having fake information and having no reliable source I having the proofs and next time I also attach the photos please give me permission Mighty.ahirs (talk) 22:25, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

@Allninemice I am having the proof and I can also attack them next time Mighty.ahirs (talk) 22:25, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Information (usually) must be supported by a reliable source to be included in an article. This is especially important if the information you are changing or removing already has a citation. If you have proof, like a book or website, you can include it in your edit. ~ANM🐁 T·C 22:33, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Sheikh, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. CocaPopsRather 14:11, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at User talk:Not-cheesewhisk3rs, you may be blocked from editing. Somepinkdude (talk) 23:48, 18 January 2026 (UTC)== Introduction to contentious topics ==

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. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Zalaraz (talk) 16:35, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Do not edit caste articles as per the above notice until you become an extended confirmed user. Ekdalian (talk) 17:04, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

This is your final warning, if you edit any caste article without having become extended confirmed, you will be reported to admins. Zalaraz (talk) 23:48, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

@Zalaraz but what I edit now Shashi.bindu (talk) 22:40, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Shashi.bindu

Thank you for your interest in . Due to past disruption, a special set of rules apply to anyone editing in this topic area. Specifically, . Since you currently do not meet the requirements to contribute to this topic area, the page you created has been nominated for speedy deletion under G5.

If you think this page does not fall under the general sanctions described, 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. Additionally you may wish to read about the topic restrictions . –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 23:57, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

January 2026

Hello, I'm Jessicapierce. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Raghuvaṃśa (dynasty) 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 or the Help desk. Thanks. Jessicapierce (talk) 01:14, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

@Jessicapierce but why? Shashi.bindu (talk) 02:04, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Unclear with poor formatting. What does Rama(mughal king akbar)<ref> ei a akbari</ref> (replacing Rama and Krishna) mean? –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:14, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

@LaundryPizza03 I having a proof of this line and I can prove it Shashi.bindu (talk) 07:00, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

By the way, <ref> tags are normally used for citations, not notes. If "ei a akbari" is supposed to be a citation, we will need more information to locate it. See Help:References for assistance. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 07:03, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Rajasthan, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Jessicapierce (talk) 01:14, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Baburnama, 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: Baburnama was changed by Shashi.bindu (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.958276 on 2026-01-17T23:41:38+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 23:41, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Sheikh, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. CocaPopsRather 14:11, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make a disruptive edit to Wikipedia contrary to the Manual of Style, as you did at Pawan Singh. CodeTalker (talk) 02:34, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. However, in your recent edit to Kabaddi in India, you added links to an article which did not add content or meaning, or repeated the same link several times throughout the article. Please see Wikipedia's guideline on links to avoid overlinking. Thank you. Jessicapierce (talk) 03:33, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. However, in your recent edit to Class 1 World Powerboat Championship, you added links to an article which did not add content or meaning, or repeated the same link several times throughout the article. Please see Wikipedia's guideline on links to avoid overlinking. Thank you. Jessicapierce (talk) 03:33, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Jessicapierce. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, it's important to be mindful of the feelings of your fellow editors, who may be frustrated by certain types of interaction, such as your addition to User talk:Ekdalian. While you probably didn't intend any offense, please do remember that Wikipedia strives to be an inclusive atmosphere. In light of that, it would be greatly appreciated if you could moderate yourself so as not to offend. Thank you. Jessicapierce (talk) 03:33, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make a disruptive edit to Wikipedia contrary to the Manual of Style, as you did at Giuseppe Mazzini. Jessicapierce (talk) 17:41, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

If you cannot use standard punctuation, capitalization, spelling, and grammar, as at Theodolite, and Bhāskara I, and Rationing, please have someone check your work before you submit it. When every sentence is full of errors, you are asking too much cleanup work from others, and your work will continue to be removed. You also risk your account being blocked. Currently your edits are not constructive. Jessicapierce (talk) 17:41, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

@Jessicapierce but all information which I write is also in the source same as I write Shashi.bindu (talk) 22:52, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

@Jessicapierce but I only write the same thing written in a history book in india so why at every step I receive this message Shashi.bindu (talk) 22:49, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

You must write according to the Manual of Style if you wish to contribute to the English-language Wikipedia. I will attach an automated message below, with links about other Wikis. Jessicapierce (talk) 01:11, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Jessicapierce. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent additions was removed because it appeared to be in a language other than English. We can only accept English-language text on this version of Wikipedia; if you would like to contribute to a Wikipedia in another language, please visit the list of Wikipedias and see if a version of Wikipedia exists in your desired language. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Jessicapierce (talk) 01:11, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Zalaraz (talk) 01:52, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

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 ~~~~}}.  Black Kite (talk) 13:57, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

Appeal for unblock the account

{{unblock|1= Shashi.bindu (talk) 15:38, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

You must post your appeal exactly as instructed in the block notice above, replacing the "Your reason here" text with your appeal rationale (written by you in your own words, not using AI). -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:52, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

Appeal for unblock the account

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I know some of my edits had mistakes. New editor, didn't fully understand all rules. Just wanted people to know correct history facts.I promise now:Will add sources with every Fact keep neutral Language no personal Attacks will work only with reliable sources like Ptolemy, Ballia Gazetteer. Please give one more chance.Thank you Shashi.bindu (talk) 16:11, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Yes, as a new editor, you are allowed a certain latitude in terms of making mistakes. However, you must at least understand the basics, and more to the point be willing to learn from your mistakes. This page has a long litany of advisory and warning messages, and most of your edits were reverted with reason, which should have prompted you to understand the rules better, but there is no real evidence that you did. Most seriously, as a new user you are not allowed to edit on caste-related subjects, which was pointed out five days ago, but which you appear to have ignored. As a bare minimum, before you could be unblocked, you must confirm that you understand the restrictions in the contentious topics notice near the top of this page, and agree to comply with them strictly. For now, I am declining your unblock request. DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:45, 21 January 2026 (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.

Once again, you had not used the appeal template correctly; I have corrected it for you. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:36, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

Appeal for unblock the account

please give me only single one more chance I request you to unblock my account,next time I will not make mistakes and I agree with you but..... Only one more chance please! Shashi.bindu (talk) 21:28, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

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).

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

---

Request reason:

Hello, I respectfully request a review of the block on my account. If any of my edits unintentionally violated Wikipedia policies, I sincerely apologize. There was no bad intention; all edits were made in good faith for informational purposes. I have now understood the relevant guidelines and assure responsible editing in the future. Kindly reconsider the block. Thank you. Shashi.bindu (talk) 21:48, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. 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) 22:10, 21 January 2026 (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.

You've now wasted two unblock requests. Please carefully review WP:GAB before making your next one. You don't get an infinite number. --Yamla (talk) 22:10, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

(Non-administrator comment) I'm also fairly certain that you used AI to write this appeal for you. Please read WP:LLMAPPEAL.

It's not necessarily that this wasn't done in good faith, it's that you're weren't following multiple guidelines and policies, plus your edits are poor quality overall.

In your appeal, you'd need to show an understanding of every policy & guideline you broke, as well as an understanding of the quality of your edits and what you should have done instead.

That's a very high bar to pass, so you may be better suited to work on a different Wikipedia, if English is not your native language - please see List of Wikipedias to find one. Blue Sonnet (talk) 08:34, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

Yes, that is clearly AI-generated.

@Shashi.bindu: we are trying to gauge whether you understand our policies and guidelines sufficiently for you to be unblocked. When AI tells you to say "I have now understood the relevant guidelines", and you say to us that "I have now understood the relevant guidelines", that tells us nothing other than you know how to use AI. And that, in turn, at least strongly suggests that you have not understood them. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:42, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

What mistakes I done

i am not using Ai this word are my self , 1. I work on a article related to caste 2. I put lines without any source 3. I not use normal language because I use book for article writing or line writings 4. I attack too more links in a article which are not related to the article 5. I am not know more policies and rules 6. But I also follow the rules and also want to improve myself Please! Please! Unblock me this is a very necessary thing,the indian needs my contribution Shashi.bindu (talk) 09:32, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

What's your final answer

next time I also improve in my self ,but many time I have done nothing but warning notification come on my account I only writes a full name of a person in article and warning notification comes Please give me your final answer Shashi.bindu (talk) 09:58, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

(Non-administrator comment) Hi again, you don't have an open appeal so am administrator can't review your case.

It's good that you understand what you did wrong, but you also need to understand what you should have done instead, otherwise you'll carry on making the same mistakes if you're unblocked. You also carried on after being warned, which isn't good.

It's good that you want to learn, but if you cause too many problems that other volunteers have to fix, perhaps you should consider a different language Wikipedia - a list is on the List of Wikipedias. Blue Sonnet (talk) 13:44, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

Open appeal for unblock the account

okay thank you for your help but what do you mean by open appeal please can you explain it?, 1.You should confirm if the added source is reliable and verifiable before including it. 2. Check if your changes improve the article and benefit other readers by adding value without redundancy. 3.Verify that added links directly relate to the main article topic and provide essential information.Ensure the link you added inside the article isn't already present to avoid duplication. 4. Before adding each line, confirm it follows Wikipedia rules, remains simple and easy, stays relevant to the article, makes logical sense, and is truly necessary. wikipedia requires all sources to be reliable, such as peer-reviewed journals or reputable news, and every claim needs a citation for verifiability. Changes must enhance the article without overlinking or adding irrelevant content, and links should not duplicate existing ones or lead to unexpected targets. Always preview edits to check for prior existence and consensus on style.Additional Best Practices be bold but verify sources first to prevent removal.Use neutral, simple language that aligns with article tone .For future edits, follow the five pillars and citing sources help pages . Your commitment to avoid repeats shows good growth. Next time I also use the other language wikipedia Please now unblock my account please! Shashi.bindu (talk) 22:56, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi again, you need to submit a new appeal with a new template.

You follow the instructions that are on the original block notice - you can read Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks if you need help. It's important that you do this yourself, to show you understand how Wikipedia works Blue Sonnet (talk) 03:42, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

Wait for answer

so now what's your last answer for my account is it unblock or block Shashi.bindu (talk) 05:15, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

(Non-administrator comment) You need to follow the instructions I've given you at Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks - if you don't want to/cannot do this, then your block will remain. Blue Sonnet (talk) 06:05, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

as you said I again go on Wikipedia:guide to appealing blocks but what I do now there Shashi.bindu (talk) 07:02, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

Stop making these nonsensical edits. You are blocked, and only allowed to edit this page for the purposes of appealing your block. You are blocked because you clearly do not have the competencies required to edit the (English-language) Wikipedia, and with each edit like this you are only making that more obvious. Either post an actual appeal, or don't edit at all. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:26, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

As you said

as you said I again go on appealing blocks page but what I do now Shashi.bindu (talk) 07:03, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

You are blocked from editing Wikipedia and cannot edit other pages, only this one - you must read the page I asked you to, then either post your appeal here using the template, or stop editing entirely.

If you don't post an appeal using the right template with your next edit, I will have to ask an administrator to remove your access to this page also.Blue Sonnet (talk) 07:41, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

Appeal for unblock account

please unblock my account I already send many things Shashi.bindu (talk) 11:01, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

January 2026

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. In addition, your ability to edit your talk page has also been revoked.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then submit a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.  Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 02:47, 24 January 2026 (UTC)