Hello, I'm Tacyarg. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, O. P. Singh, 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 referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Tacyarg ( talk) 15:20, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Subhash Ghai, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page FIR. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 05:58, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
In this edit here, I reverted some information that appears to be a violation of our copyright policy.
I provided a brief summary of the problem in the edit summary, which should be visible just below my name. You can also click on the "view history" tab in the article to see the recent history of the article. This should be an edit with my name, and a parenthetical comment explaining why your edit was reverted. If that information is not sufficient to explain the situation, please ask.
I do occasionally make mistakes. We get hundreds of reports of potential copyright violations every week, and sometimes there are false positives, for a variety of reasons. (Perhaps the material was moved from another Wikipedia article, or the material was properly licensed but the license information was not obvious, or the material is in the public domain but I didn't realize it was public domain, and there can be other situations generating a report to our Copy Patrol tool that turn out not to be actual copyright violations.) If you think my edit was mistaken, please politely let me know and I will investigate. S Philbrick (Talk) 14:15, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi Genuinewikiuser! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor at Gautam Adani that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. -- Toddy1 (talk) 15:12, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that your recent edit to Gautam Adani did not have an edit summary. You can use the edit summary field to explain your reasoning for an edit, or to provide a description of what the edit changes. Summaries save time for other editors and reduce the chances that your edit will be misunderstood. For some edits, an adequate summary may be quite brief.
The edit summary field looks like this:
Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)
Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary, and then click the "Save" button. Thanks! -- Toddy1 (talk) 15:12, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Doug Weller. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Bharatiya Janata Party, 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 referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Doug Weller talk 08:44, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Draft:Adhikar Sena a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Adhikar Sena. This is known as a " cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.
In most cases for registered users, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. DanCherek ( talk) 15:49, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
You have recently been editing India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan which has been designated a contentious topic. 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.
Doug Weller talk 08:46, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
Doug Weller talk 08:54, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Akhilesh Yadav, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page PTI.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:02, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Genuinewikiuser. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Amitabh Thakur, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:
In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.
Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Maduant ( talk) 11:53, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Genuinewikiuser
Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Bensci54, and I thank you for your contributions.
I wanted to let you know, however, that I've proposed an article that you started, Azad Adhikar Sena, for deletion because it meets one or more of our deletion criteria, and I don't think that it is suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. The particular issue can be found in the notice that is now visible at the top of the article.
If you wish to contest the deletion:
{{proposed deletion/dated...}}
If you object to the article's deletion, please remember to explain why you think the article should be kept on the article's talk page and improve the page to address the issues raised in the deletion notice. Otherwise, it may be deleted later by other means.
If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Bensci54}}
. And remember to sign your reply with ~~~~
. Thanks!
(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
Bensci54 ( talk) 16:24, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:37, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Akhilesh Yadav, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page DGP.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 18:04, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
Can you please explain what you are trying to do with edits like these? [1], [2]. The first is completely bizarre; the second does not cite any sources, something you've been warned about before. It seems to me you're not taking editing here very seriously. Vanamonde93 ( talk) 05:46, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for your contributions to Avinash Kumar. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and you may have a possible Conflict of Interest. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.
Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. — DaxServer ( t · m · e · c) 11:34, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
You have recently edited a page related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, 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 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.
— DaxServer ( t · m · e · c) 21:52, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for your contributions to Pachrukhiya case. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has too many problems of language or grammar, you may have a possible Conflict of Interest and also a contentious WP:BLP article. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.
Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. — DaxServer ( t · m · e · c) 07:25, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for your contributions to 2007 Gorakhpur Riots. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has too many problems of language or grammar, you may have a possible Conflict of Interest and has issues of editorialization. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.
Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. — DaxServer ( t · m · e · c) 07:28, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
You have recently made edits related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. This is a standard message to inform you that India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. Contentious topics are the successor to the former discretionary sanctions system, which you may be aware of. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. For a summary of difference between the former and new system, see WP:CTVSDS. Doug Weller talk 08:41, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Genuinewikiuser!
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!
ANUwrites 14:08, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
|
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
Doug Weller
talk 08:36, 13 March 2024 (UTC)@ Doug Weller: please could you help with the following: It appears that Genuinewikiuser tried to give Draft:2007 Gorakhpur Riots a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into 2007 Gorakhpur riots. I have asked for a history merge. Thank you. -- Toddy1 (talk) 09:41, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
but do not submit.{{
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.Genuinewikiuser ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
My reasons for requesting to unblock my two accounts @GenuineWikiuser and @Goodwikie are as follows-
1. I have never hidden any fact from Wikipedia and have always been completely transparent in my functioning, including the fact that I had personal interests in pages like
Amitabh Thakur,
Nutan Thakur,
Azad Adhikar Sena etc, which I very clearly stated/mentioned it, even before anyone asked me.
2. I made edits for these pages but none of these edits was hypothetical, unwarranted or imaginary. Instead each of these edits was based solely on facts and was backed by a large number of reliable sources. That is the reason why all these pages still have many of the Edits made by me completely intact.
3. I also made many edits to various other pages. Some of them were small, while many of them were important contribution to Wikipedia. Hence it can be seen that I had been a valuable and useful contributor to Wikipedia, to the best of my abilities.
4. The trouble started when I edited a few pages related with
Bhartiya Janata Party (
BJP) leaders including
Kalyan Singh,
Kusum Rai,
Ram Prakash Gupta,
Yogi Adityanath,
Lalji Tandon etc.
5. These edits were based on facts and reliable news articles. They were also historically relevant and none of them were irrelevant in any manner. Even when they were related with personal lives of these leaders, these facts had their independent and important political/historical reasons, as these issues had played important role in the course of political history.
6. These edits were almost immediately removed after being presented, despite the edits being truthful, genuine and based on reliable evidences.
7. Not fully acquainted with the Wikipedia way of functioning, instead of referring the matters to higher Editors, I got many of these pages re-edited and restored.
8. The same thing happened with three pages I created, on
2007 Gorakhpur Riots, on
Pachrukhiya case and on
Parvez Parwaz, all related with current
Uttar Pradesh
Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath in different ways.
9. All these events have extreme historic and political importance in UP Politics, but these Pages were also immediately removed.
10. Once again, instead of referring the matter to higher Editors, I myself tried to restore it, which I admit as being my mistake.
11. I also made certain comments as regards the Editors, who removed/deleted my Edits and Pages, which were personal in nature and should have certainly been avoided.
12. In the meanwhile, I have understood the functioning of Wikipedia in a much better way and shall not repeat these mistakes. I would also prove to be a useful hand for Wikipedia, given my enthusiasm for the work, my sincerity, my urge for truthfulness and insistence on reliable evidences.
13. In view of all these facts, I request you to kindly immediately revoke the ban/blocking done to me on Edit.
14. I give the most earnest and sincere undertaking that these inadvertent mistakes will not get repeated, and also that I shall take every measure to get fully assimilated in the large ocean of respected Wikipedia editors. I also assure you that I shall make as much valuable contributions to Wikipedia as possible.
15. Finally, I also make an open disclaimer that as righty pointed out, I work through two accounts, @GenuineWikiuser and @Goodwikie and the issues related with both these accounts is the same, which shall never ever happen again.
16. Hence, I most humbly request to kindly unblock both these Wikipedia accounts, @GenuineWikiuser and @Goodwikie. Regards, @GenuineWikiuser / @Goodwikie -
Genuinewikiuser (
talk) 14:36, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Above your unblock request is a big warning: Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped. In other words, I'm not allowed to grant your request. If you'd like, leave a message with a link to the userpage of the person who blocked you (include the code [[User:Doug Weller]] in the message) and ask him to review your request, since he's allowed to unblock you if he believes it appropriate. Nyttend ( talk) 10:27, 23 April 2024 (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.
Hello, I'm Tacyarg. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, O. P. Singh, 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 referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Tacyarg ( talk) 15:20, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Subhash Ghai, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page FIR. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 05:58, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
In this edit here, I reverted some information that appears to be a violation of our copyright policy.
I provided a brief summary of the problem in the edit summary, which should be visible just below my name. You can also click on the "view history" tab in the article to see the recent history of the article. This should be an edit with my name, and a parenthetical comment explaining why your edit was reverted. If that information is not sufficient to explain the situation, please ask.
I do occasionally make mistakes. We get hundreds of reports of potential copyright violations every week, and sometimes there are false positives, for a variety of reasons. (Perhaps the material was moved from another Wikipedia article, or the material was properly licensed but the license information was not obvious, or the material is in the public domain but I didn't realize it was public domain, and there can be other situations generating a report to our Copy Patrol tool that turn out not to be actual copyright violations.) If you think my edit was mistaken, please politely let me know and I will investigate. S Philbrick (Talk) 14:15, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi Genuinewikiuser! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor at Gautam Adani that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. -- Toddy1 (talk) 15:12, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that your recent edit to Gautam Adani did not have an edit summary. You can use the edit summary field to explain your reasoning for an edit, or to provide a description of what the edit changes. Summaries save time for other editors and reduce the chances that your edit will be misunderstood. For some edits, an adequate summary may be quite brief.
The edit summary field looks like this:
Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)
Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary, and then click the "Save" button. Thanks! -- Toddy1 (talk) 15:12, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Doug Weller. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Bharatiya Janata Party, 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 referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Doug Weller talk 08:44, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Draft:Adhikar Sena a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Adhikar Sena. This is known as a " cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.
In most cases for registered users, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. DanCherek ( talk) 15:49, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
You have recently been editing India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan which has been designated a contentious topic. 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.
Doug Weller talk 08:46, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
Doug Weller talk 08:54, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Akhilesh Yadav, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page PTI.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:02, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Genuinewikiuser. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Amitabh Thakur, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:
In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.
Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Maduant ( talk) 11:53, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Genuinewikiuser
Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Bensci54, and I thank you for your contributions.
I wanted to let you know, however, that I've proposed an article that you started, Azad Adhikar Sena, for deletion because it meets one or more of our deletion criteria, and I don't think that it is suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. The particular issue can be found in the notice that is now visible at the top of the article.
If you wish to contest the deletion:
{{proposed deletion/dated...}}
If you object to the article's deletion, please remember to explain why you think the article should be kept on the article's talk page and improve the page to address the issues raised in the deletion notice. Otherwise, it may be deleted later by other means.
If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Bensci54}}
. And remember to sign your reply with ~~~~
. Thanks!
(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
Bensci54 ( talk) 16:24, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:37, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Akhilesh Yadav, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page DGP.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 18:04, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
Can you please explain what you are trying to do with edits like these? [1], [2]. The first is completely bizarre; the second does not cite any sources, something you've been warned about before. It seems to me you're not taking editing here very seriously. Vanamonde93 ( talk) 05:46, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for your contributions to Avinash Kumar. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and you may have a possible Conflict of Interest. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.
Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. — DaxServer ( t · m · e · c) 11:34, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
You have recently edited a page related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, 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 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.
— DaxServer ( t · m · e · c) 21:52, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for your contributions to Pachrukhiya case. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has too many problems of language or grammar, you may have a possible Conflict of Interest and also a contentious WP:BLP article. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.
Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. — DaxServer ( t · m · e · c) 07:25, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for your contributions to 2007 Gorakhpur Riots. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has too many problems of language or grammar, you may have a possible Conflict of Interest and has issues of editorialization. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.
Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. — DaxServer ( t · m · e · c) 07:28, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
You have recently made edits related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. This is a standard message to inform you that India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. Contentious topics are the successor to the former discretionary sanctions system, which you may be aware of. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. For a summary of difference between the former and new system, see WP:CTVSDS. Doug Weller talk 08:41, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Genuinewikiuser!
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!
ANUwrites 14:08, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
|
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
Doug Weller
talk 08:36, 13 March 2024 (UTC)@ Doug Weller: please could you help with the following: It appears that Genuinewikiuser tried to give Draft:2007 Gorakhpur Riots a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into 2007 Gorakhpur riots. I have asked for a history merge. Thank you. -- Toddy1 (talk) 09:41, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
but do not submit.{{
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.Genuinewikiuser ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
My reasons for requesting to unblock my two accounts @GenuineWikiuser and @Goodwikie are as follows-
1. I have never hidden any fact from Wikipedia and have always been completely transparent in my functioning, including the fact that I had personal interests in pages like
Amitabh Thakur,
Nutan Thakur,
Azad Adhikar Sena etc, which I very clearly stated/mentioned it, even before anyone asked me.
2. I made edits for these pages but none of these edits was hypothetical, unwarranted or imaginary. Instead each of these edits was based solely on facts and was backed by a large number of reliable sources. That is the reason why all these pages still have many of the Edits made by me completely intact.
3. I also made many edits to various other pages. Some of them were small, while many of them were important contribution to Wikipedia. Hence it can be seen that I had been a valuable and useful contributor to Wikipedia, to the best of my abilities.
4. The trouble started when I edited a few pages related with
Bhartiya Janata Party (
BJP) leaders including
Kalyan Singh,
Kusum Rai,
Ram Prakash Gupta,
Yogi Adityanath,
Lalji Tandon etc.
5. These edits were based on facts and reliable news articles. They were also historically relevant and none of them were irrelevant in any manner. Even when they were related with personal lives of these leaders, these facts had their independent and important political/historical reasons, as these issues had played important role in the course of political history.
6. These edits were almost immediately removed after being presented, despite the edits being truthful, genuine and based on reliable evidences.
7. Not fully acquainted with the Wikipedia way of functioning, instead of referring the matters to higher Editors, I got many of these pages re-edited and restored.
8. The same thing happened with three pages I created, on
2007 Gorakhpur Riots, on
Pachrukhiya case and on
Parvez Parwaz, all related with current
Uttar Pradesh
Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath in different ways.
9. All these events have extreme historic and political importance in UP Politics, but these Pages were also immediately removed.
10. Once again, instead of referring the matter to higher Editors, I myself tried to restore it, which I admit as being my mistake.
11. I also made certain comments as regards the Editors, who removed/deleted my Edits and Pages, which were personal in nature and should have certainly been avoided.
12. In the meanwhile, I have understood the functioning of Wikipedia in a much better way and shall not repeat these mistakes. I would also prove to be a useful hand for Wikipedia, given my enthusiasm for the work, my sincerity, my urge for truthfulness and insistence on reliable evidences.
13. In view of all these facts, I request you to kindly immediately revoke the ban/blocking done to me on Edit.
14. I give the most earnest and sincere undertaking that these inadvertent mistakes will not get repeated, and also that I shall take every measure to get fully assimilated in the large ocean of respected Wikipedia editors. I also assure you that I shall make as much valuable contributions to Wikipedia as possible.
15. Finally, I also make an open disclaimer that as righty pointed out, I work through two accounts, @GenuineWikiuser and @Goodwikie and the issues related with both these accounts is the same, which shall never ever happen again.
16. Hence, I most humbly request to kindly unblock both these Wikipedia accounts, @GenuineWikiuser and @Goodwikie. Regards, @GenuineWikiuser / @Goodwikie -
Genuinewikiuser (
talk) 14:36, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Above your unblock request is a big warning: Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped. In other words, I'm not allowed to grant your request. If you'd like, leave a message with a link to the userpage of the person who blocked you (include the code [[User:Doug Weller]] in the message) and ask him to review your request, since he's allowed to unblock you if he believes it appropriate. Nyttend ( talk) 10:27, 23 April 2024 (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.