User talk:Authornumber007

Welcome[edit]

Hello, Authornumber007, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page – I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.

Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:

Table of contents / Department directory

The Wikipedia Adventure (a tutorial orienting you with Wikipedia)
The Signpost, our newspaper

Need help?

Questions – a guide on where to ask questions
Cheatsheet – quick reference on Wikipedia's mark-up codes
Wikipedia's 5 pillars – an overview of Wikipedia's foundations

Article wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles
The simplified ruleset – a summary of Wikipedia's most important rules
Guide to Wikipedia – a thorough step-by-step guide to Wikipedia

How you can help:

Contributing to Wikipedia – a guide on how you can help

Community portal – Wikipedia's hub of activity

Additional tips...

Please sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically insert your "signature" (your username and a date stamp). The or button, on the tool bar above Wikipedia's text editing window, also does this.
If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills without changing the mainspace, the Sandbox is for you.

Authornumber007, good luck, and have fun. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 10:41, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse Invitation[edit]

Hello! Authornumber007, you are invited to the Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us! Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 10:42, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest[edit]

Hello, Authornumber007. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, 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:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must 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 WP:PAID).

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. GSS (talk|c|em) 17:21, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What is this ? Author007 04:13, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Rategain Technologies[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Rategain Technologies requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company, corporation or organization that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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. Velella ^{Velella Talk} 04:30, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

January 2019[edit]

Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself, as you did with Rategain Technologies. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Contest this speedy deletion, which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Special:Diff/877981058 Cabayi (talk) 11:46, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation[edit]

An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wikibaji, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

Cabayi (talk) 12:00, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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).

Authornumber007 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I find i am blocked and the pages i created got deleted. On research i found that i have been deleted on the basis of using multiple account ! I do not use any multiple account and i am not a sockpuppet of any wikibaji as what i can see. How on earth will i be blocked for a fake accusision ! Its agains my right to edit in wiki ! I have been good in wiki and havent violated any policies of wiki! Please restore my account and my pages !

Decline reason:

You are mistaken, you have no right to edit here. In order to be unblocked, you'll need to refute the evidence presented against you at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wikibaji. Yamla (talk) 16:48, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Author007 16:10, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

I couldn't find any evidence mentioned in that page ? As i am blocked i am not able to edit the page you mentioned ? I find my chance for unblocking is by requesting here and no where else i can edit ? So why are you telling me i have no right to edit here ? Admin Yamla please see into it Author007 03:28, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

This blocked user is asking that her block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Authornumber007 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #23773 was submitted on Jan 17, 2019 14:50:49. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 14:50, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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).

Authornumber007 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

As per the email reply i got to the UTRS-unblock request, I am applying the unblock request in my talk page.I am not the sockpuppet of wikibaji. The checkuser evidence is not clearly demonstrated in the investigation page. I have got no time to defend myself in the investigation page before blocking me. I can disclose my personal details to help the investigation and I want to prove I am not the sockpuppet of wikibaji. Kindly unblock for the reason stated. Author007 14:50, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Decline reason:

You recreated the same article as previous sockpuppets (apparently namegaming to avoid the automatic G4 deletion that would have resulted form the page's previous deletions), and your IP address shows you editing from the same location. You will need to explain your sudden burning need to create an article about Rategain Technologies so soon after RateGain was deleted, and the similarity in CU data. Yunshui ^雲 _水 15:24, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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.

@Yunshui: :

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).

Authornumber007 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have explained about all those scenario in my email to arbcom-en@wikimedia.org previously, but they suggested me to create unblock request here. I dont know how on earth will an article created by me is exactly similar to an article which got deleted. I did nearly 5 days research and coded the wiki article for rategain technologies , The article creation was suggested by one of my friend who works in rategain as an executive. I created 2 pages so far in wiki, on is of an author and the other is for this firm. I had no clue that rategain technologies wiki article was previously deleted. But i am amazed to hear that the article which i created looks same to the one which was deleted . Can you please recheck the previous article if you have access . Also I am from Kerala, But i don't know where is this wikibaji is from. I am using an idea connection. But how on earth is my ip same as his/her ip ? I want proof please . This is all fake accusitions/ misunderstanding. Kindly help me by proving exact proof which you have. Also on research i find that it was at 23:00, 18 December 2017 the RateGain page you mentioned got deleted. So i created the page in 2019 , its been nearly 2 years and you mentioned it as "i created it so soon as the page "RateGain" got deleted". Kindly listen to my query. Author007 19:05, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Whether or not you are actually the same person as the one who wrote the previous version of the article, you admit below that you were proxying for someone who is either blocked or is coordinating multiple people with different accounts to evade Wikipedia's policies. That is not allowed. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:29, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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.

"The article creation was suggested by one of my friend who works in rategain as an executive" Here, you are admitting to violating WP:MEAT and WP:COI, and possibly WP:EVADE, too, if you are helping a blocked user avoid their block by having you edit on their behalf. --Yamla (talk) 21:27, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Yamla: : "So what are you telling ? we can't create an article on suggestion ?Usually a lot of suggestions and info come in daily , and I have not admitted to violate any rules in wiki and i don't think the guy who suggested me to create the article have a wikipedia account.In case you need I can provide his personal info. You can cross check that. So how on earth you can conclude and reject my block ? And before I disclose about more details how did the block happen . Please provide the proof/exact reason and evidence which were collected to block me if you have. I am getting fed up with this unblock requesting. Author007 15:03, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't block you. The evidence against you is shown at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Wikibaji/Archive where it is noted that you are confirmed as a WP:SOCK of Wikibaji. I point you once again at WP:MEAT and WP:COI. You are welcome to make another unblock request and another administrator will review it. I have nothing more to say to you, so do not ping me further. --Yamla (talk) 15:21, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]