User talk:Weeabo-kun2198

Hi Weeabo-kun2198! I noticed your contributions to 32nd century BC and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! Wareon (talk) 16:55, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wait is this a bot? Weeabo-kun2198 (talk) 17:05, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia waeron muhahaha i have been using this website for years now muhahaha hope you're liking this fuwahwahawhaha Weeabo-kun2198 (talk) 18:04, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Muhahaha I think you need some help pal Weeabo-kun2198 (talk) 18:05, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Krishna Is Parabrahman Change My Mind Weeabo-kun2198 (talk) 18:10, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. I am glad to see that you are discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Talk:Vishnu are for discussion related to improving (a) an encyclopedia article in specific ways based on reliable sources or (b) project policies and guidelines. They are not for general discussion about the article topic or unrelated topics, or statements based on your thoughts or feelings. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. Chariotrider555 (talk) 19:01, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sup Sutaputra Also When You're Gonna Add Absolute Protection To Such As Vishnu Gg Also Vishnu Is Omnipotent It's Not A Statement The Greatest Epic Of All Time I Posted In Mahabharata Can Be Called An Opinion Also No Offense I am not racist or anything but my friends told me that most hindu Edits are from Jewish editors this the reason why they don't trust Wikipedia now now don't blame me i didn't said that i was merely saying that as a messenger also i'm using Wikipedia for years on thank you - Weeabo-kun2198 Weeabo-kun2198 (talk) 19:09, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from using talk pages such as Talk:Mahabharata for general discussion of the topic or other unrelated topics. They are for discussion related to improving the article in specific ways, based on reliable sources and the project policies and guidelines; they are not for use as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See here for more information. Thank you. Chariotrider555 (talk) 19:12, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Chariotrider555. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, 32nd century BC, 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. Chariotrider555 (talk) 19:14, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Are you a bot rn also it's mentioned in the Mahabharata that Krishna died on the same time as kali yuga started this can be found on the last Parva of the Mahabharata Weeabo-kun2198 (talk) 19:16, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Vishnu, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Chariotrider555 (talk) 19:17, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Chariotrider555. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Vishnu seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Chariotrider555 (talk) 19:17, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yup you made a mistake without reading mahabharata Weeabo-kun2198 (talk) 19:17, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's a basic information for the readers of mahabharata vishnu is omnipotent as mentioned in bhagavad gita and vishnu purana Weeabo-kun2198 (talk) 19:18, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your nitpicking and being biased i win win bye you clearly need to read bhagavad gita chapter 11 - 10-9-8 if you want to know why vishnu is considered as omnipotent as per vishnu purana it mentions that vishnu is beyond all things such as death and life it's in the first chapter of Vishnu purana Weeabo-kun2198 (talk) 19:21, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Now restore the content Weeabo-kun2198 (talk) 19:22, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have provided info from my scriptures now it's your duty since you removed those things without reading the actual scriptures Weeabo-kun2198 (talk) 19:23, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Any questions or shall i provide more info? Weeabo-kun2198 (talk) 19:24, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Chariotrider555 (talk) 19:24, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also i am being neutral as i'm saying those things from the actual scriptures not opinions smh Weeabo-kun2198 (talk) 19:25, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm also mahishasura did defeated vishnu but also Mahadev who is also one of the omnipotent beings in Hinduism as mentioned in shiv purana and even mahabharata vishnu and Mahadeva were defeated because they had to respect the boons of brahma given to mahishasura that they will be killed by adi parashakti not vishnu or shiva so there you go i debunked this anti feat if you were able to raise this question Weeabo-kun2198 (talk) 19:29, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Now did you restored my Edits or shall i do it myself eh? Weeabo-kun2198 (talk) 19:29, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey answer me! Weeabo-kun2198 (talk) 19:31, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yo are you alive or you're just a mere bot? Weeabo-kun2198 (talk) 19:31, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Don't expect people to answer you immediately and don't restore your edit. We don't use religious texts as sources, we rely on secondary sources interpreting them - what you call opinions. See WP:Primary, secondary and tertiary sources "All analyses and interpretive or synthetic claims about primary sources must be referenced to a secondary or tertiary source, and must not be an original analysis of the primary-source material by Wikipedia editors." You also need to stop using talk pages to express your opinions about what's the best whatever. Doug Weller talk 19:34, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's policies on reliable sources, verifiability, neutral point-of-view, original resarch, and what Wikipedia is not. Chariotrider555 (talk) 19:36, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Doug Weller. I noticed that you made a comment on the page User talk:Chariotrider555 that didn't seem very civil, so it may have been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Doug Weller talk 19:39, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok American if this what people on Wikipedia does welp damn man i don't know what to expect lmao we're talking on a religious topic on an God from Hinduism welp if you don't wanna restore my Edits that's fine i'm being half serious and half sarcastic if you don't wanna belive in our scriptures that's also fine i ain't gonna cancel You on twitter just because of that now i see why my friends doesn't rely on Wikipedia since most of the editors are arrogant editors that doesn't know anything about Hinduism i was trying to help not to vandalize thing if you don't want to see me anymore that's fine i am done with using Wikipedia anyways cuz no one believes in the Orginal source thank you and bye Weeabo-kun2198 (talk) 19:41, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also bhagavad gita is not considered a religious text as there are thousand of Archeological evidences that shows that mahabharata did happened but Krishna being the almighty GOD is also the reason why bhagavad gita is considered as a religious text Weeabo-kun2198 (talk) 19:43, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bye it was nice talking with you most of the things i said are satire so don't take it seriously and i'm not angry or sad anyways it was nice talking with you Weeabo-kun2198 (talk) 19:45, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. You are adding something not backed by our article Krishna. If he every lived, his dates are not known but debated. And our article doesn't call him "Lord". Doug Weller talk 17:43, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Technically it is said that Krishna's Death was the beginning of the Kali yuga you can see that in your own airtcle page and Lord has to nothing do with the relevant question Weeabo-kun2198 (talk) 17:57, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Even the Orginal mahabharata says that kali yuga began after jara Shoted Krishna's Toe/Leg so yeah if the dates are unknown then the date in kali yuga page is also unknown as per kali yuga began with Krishna's Death and that should be removed according to your statement Weeabo-kun2198 (talk) 18:09, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also what is every lived? Weeabo-kun2198 (talk) 18:11, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So yeah if that gives a Range of ideas then why Krishna's Death date is in the kali yuga page why don't you remove it? That's your duty as a admin Weeabo-kun2198 (talk) 18:27, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:32nd-century BC deaths requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

POV nonsense - similar edits made 32nd century BC and have been reverted

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria 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. Ravensfire (talk) 18:37, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have been editing tendentiously and seem completely uninterested in our policies and principles when people inform you of them. Insisting on treating religious texts as reliable sources is against Wikipedia's policies, as you have been repeatedly told. Also, complaining about Jewish editors is highly offensive. Stating things like "I am not racist" and "most of the things i said are satire so don't take it seriously" does not get you out of the things you actually said, nor out of the fact that you persistently edit in a non-neutral way. I have blocked you indefinitely. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bishonen | tålk 09:58, 30 December 2020 (UTC).[reply]