This is ShriBalajji's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
![]() |
Hello, ShriBalajji!
Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the
Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the
Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there!
Greenman (
talk)
22:04, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
|
Hello and
welcome to Wikipedia. Constructive contributions to
Wikipedia are appreciated, but
a recent edit of yours to the page
Hindu Shahis has an
edit summary that appears to be inadequate, inaccurate, or inappropriate. The summaries are helpful to people browsing an
article's history, so it is important that you use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did. Feel free to use
the sandbox to make test edits. Thank you.
Re Pa©ker&Tra©ker
(♀)
00:29, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
You have recently edited a page related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an 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 special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.
Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:
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.
Re Pa©ker&Tra©ker (♀) 00:31, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This account has been
blocked indefinitely as a
sockpuppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is
allowed, but using them for
illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban
may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sockpuppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may
appeal this block by first reading the
guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below.
Abecedare (
talk)
01:45, 21 May 2023 (UTC) |
is closed. -- Deepfriedokra ( talk) 02:22, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
ShriBalajji ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I'm ShriBalajji, and I'd want to be unblocked because I didn't breach any wiki rules despite being accused of being a sock and asking his favourite administrator to block me simply because I disagreed with his point of view. Based on my random and prior revisions, someone barred me because they felt I was linked to Hanshangling, who was also blocked. ShriBalajji ( talk) 02:36, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
Decline reason:
There are a number of behavioural similarities between your account and the blocked sockmaster which convince me that you are not being truthful. Spicy ( talk) 17:31, 30 May 2023 (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.
Dear Administrator, AbecedareFor what reason did you hinder me rapidly without utilizing any specialized examination, check_user tool, or IP area, and for what reason helped you give out to Re Packer & Tracker since he is one-sided towards Rajput position and on the grounds that he returned one alter at the Hindu Shahis line and eliminated obtained content and the unbiased perspective of one of different editors? In addition, he referred to me as a Hanshingling sock, as he is accustomed to referring to other users as sock users without conducting an investigation. You blocked me because it was unfair without seeing his biased reversion and removal of content from sources.
This is ShriBalajji's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
![]() |
Hello, ShriBalajji!
Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the
Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the
Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there!
Greenman (
talk)
22:04, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
|
Hello and
welcome to Wikipedia. Constructive contributions to
Wikipedia are appreciated, but
a recent edit of yours to the page
Hindu Shahis has an
edit summary that appears to be inadequate, inaccurate, or inappropriate. The summaries are helpful to people browsing an
article's history, so it is important that you use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did. Feel free to use
the sandbox to make test edits. Thank you.
Re Pa©ker&Tra©ker
(♀)
00:29, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
You have recently edited a page related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an 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 special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.
Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:
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.
Re Pa©ker&Tra©ker (♀) 00:31, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This account has been
blocked indefinitely as a
sockpuppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is
allowed, but using them for
illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban
may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sockpuppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may
appeal this block by first reading the
guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below.
Abecedare (
talk)
01:45, 21 May 2023 (UTC) |
is closed. -- Deepfriedokra ( talk) 02:22, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
ShriBalajji ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I'm ShriBalajji, and I'd want to be unblocked because I didn't breach any wiki rules despite being accused of being a sock and asking his favourite administrator to block me simply because I disagreed with his point of view. Based on my random and prior revisions, someone barred me because they felt I was linked to Hanshangling, who was also blocked. ShriBalajji ( talk) 02:36, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
Decline reason:
There are a number of behavioural similarities between your account and the blocked sockmaster which convince me that you are not being truthful. Spicy ( talk) 17:31, 30 May 2023 (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.
Dear Administrator, AbecedareFor what reason did you hinder me rapidly without utilizing any specialized examination, check_user tool, or IP area, and for what reason helped you give out to Re Packer & Tracker since he is one-sided towards Rajput position and on the grounds that he returned one alter at the Hindu Shahis line and eliminated obtained content and the unbiased perspective of one of different editors? In addition, he referred to me as a Hanshingling sock, as he is accustomed to referring to other users as sock users without conducting an investigation. You blocked me because it was unfair without seeing his biased reversion and removal of content from sources.