Hello, I'm Chanakal. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Pidurangala Vihara have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. Chanaka L (talk) 12:56, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to add promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia, as you did at Dhowa rock temple, you may be blocked from editing. Chanaka L (talk) 14:42, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Was not promoting or advertising material. Citations were from information sites. Please do not undo edits and mark sites as spam for personal agendas. Check if any information cited was incorrect or promotional at least. Jkthescribe (talk) 15:02, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is not the first time I've seen "ref spamming", spamming veiled as references. All of them tend to be commercial travel websites. Comercial travel websites are not WP:RS. Please stop. Chanaka L (talk) 15:07, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

None of my citations were commercial sites. Did you see any advertisements or offers of any kind? They are purely information sites providing info about Sri Lanka.

Also, why would you report sites as spam, even after you have removed my edits.

This shows that you are harassing other users.

Please note that you do not own Wikipedia. And have no right to harass other users. Jkthescribe (talk) 15:16, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, discussion pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments, as you did at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam, is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Even making spelling and grammatical corrections in others' comments is generally frowned upon, as it tends to irritate the users whose comments you are correcting. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Apparition^{11 Complaints}/Mistakes 15:14, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or change other editors' legitimate talk page comments, as you did at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam. Apparition^{11 Complaints}/Mistakes 15:19, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Again, you are welcome to reply or comment, but cannot just blank reports. Apparition^{11 Complaints}/Mistakes 15:20, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  User @ChanakalChanakaL is using wikipedia to target certain websites and file them as spam, even though they are unmonetized information sites. He does this to further his personal agenda and makes threats to block me from editing. Jkthescribe (talk) 15:26, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Even if true, that doesn't matter. You can reply to the report. I haven't looked at your contributions, but have most or a lot of your edits inserted the same link into articles? If so, that is certainly suspicious and justifies a report. If nothing else, to get other editors' opinions. If you truly feel you are being harassed, you can file a report at WP:ANI, but I would caution you about WP:BOOMERANG. Apparition^{11 Complaints}/Mistakes 15:33, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks. I was merely citing info sites that I thought were valuable on low info topics. I am not affiliated with said cites and was not promoting or advertising. Yes I will be reporting this person. Jkthescribe (talk) 15:37, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  LOL, this is laughable I have known you or your website literally hours ago. Your attempt play the victim card is ridiculous. Chanaka L (talk) 15:43, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  This person's edits were targeted. If I cited an invalid website, he could have removed citations only. However he changed paragraphs of researched text, grammatical error corrections etc that I wrote. My goal was to improve pages with little info. He just undid my edits and now they are the same as before. It seems like he is more concerned with targeting people and deleting edits rather than improving Wikipedia. Jkthescribe (talk) 15:50, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I just looked through your edits and out of 9 article edits, you added the link in every one. There has been no malfeasance here, just standard spam patrol. If you report to ANI, the odds of you being blocked are very high. If you truly have no affiliation with this site, I would suggest moving on and cease adding links to it. Apparition^{11 Complaints}/Mistakes 15:56, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Apologies. I merely quoted the site as it was the only one that had information on the edited article. Apparently ChanakaL has a problem with that site and now it's in the spam list. It's good to know how easy it is for a old user to harass a new one. He could've removed citations and left my valid edits in. Great response from you. If someone deletes your edits, forget it and move on. Nice. Jkthescribe (talk) 16:00, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  It's a travel blog and not a reliable source. It's not been added to the spam blacklist yet and likely won't be if it's there's no further cases of it being added constantly. I'm just giving you advice on how to best succeed at Wikipedia. They were correct in deleting your edits. Use reliable sources to back up your content and it will be much less likely to be deleted. Every Wikipedia editor makes mistakes. The best thing to do when you do is learn from it and move on. If you don't want to take my advice, then don't. Report away, just don't blame me when I told you the likely outcome. Apparition^{11 Complaints}/Mistakes 16:10, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Let me get this straight. So anybody can cite a site, and get it up on the spam list? For example, if someone wanted to harm a site, he could just cite it multiple times for promotional reasons, and get it on the spam list? Jkthescribe (talk) 16:16, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The spam blacklist (not the same as Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam) is here to protect Wikipedia from abuse. If a link is abused too much, it gets added. Sure, I guess if somebody's that conniving, it could happen. Of course, we're all here for the best interests of Wikipedia, not for the best interests of other sites. Apparition^{11 Complaints}/Mistakes 16:22, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Kasturi Chellaraja Wilson. Chanaka L (talk) 17:27, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges.

If you think 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 ~~~~}}.  PhilKnight (talk) 17:37, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]