User talk:Dr Meenakshi Kanwar

Welcome![edit]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia

Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
No edit warring or sock puppetry.
If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject. Deliberately adding such content or otherwise editing articles maliciously is considered vandalism; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Auric talk 11:31, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your use of multiple Wikipedia accounts[edit]

Hi. 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/Sarower Sigh Bhati, 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.

NeilN ^{talk to me} 14:47, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

September 2013[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for meat puppetry (Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sarower Sigh Bhati). If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bbb23 (talk) 19:47, 22 September 2013 (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).

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

Request reason:

Respected All

1. I Did nothing wrong and it is not fair at all.

2. I am Mother of subject therefore i can be very important person for updating information about the subject

3. I have lot of evidences, which can be very useful for the article of the subject

4. It is unfortunate that i am blocked for doing good things on Wikipedia. Raising voice against incompetent or biased people require guts. I did same and that too with evidences

5. Since DRN is filed by my husband and a section opened by me in the talk page of the article against people, who degrade subject insult us, therefore blocking will encourage such people to continue with such activities further.

6. Blocking me will result only in a lose-lose situation between Subject of article and Wikipedia and the only winners would be the cartel of few people of Wikipedia, who are busy not in fair editing but purely involved in dictatorship with ulterior motive of degrading subject and insulting people.

7. Even they insult Wikipedia by giving no respect to Wikipedia by projecting themselves to be above Wikipedia that too in a cartel. Their clear reflection is that the article is at the mercy of sycophancy to them and not on the basis of Wikipedia norms.

8. OK i am blocked but at least take severe action against people, who are involved in making misuse/fun of Wikipedia. I am 100% Sure that if all the sections of the talk page of subject (Present/Archives/History) is analysed by a senior , independent arbitrator then a big scandal will be unearthed.

9. Finally I will approach arbitration committee and invite an arbitrator for seeking justice. I still have a great faith in Wikipedia. Therefore i will go for all my attempts to make sure that I inform Wikipedia about people who insult people, degrade subject, do not respect Wikipedia. Dr Meenakshi Kanwar (talk) 02:08, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

No valid reason given to unblock. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 17:55, 26 September 2013 (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.

Based on the outcome of the SPI report, the basis for this block is now sock puppetry.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:11, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Your talk page access has been revoked for persistent abuse of this page.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:30, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]