Jump to content

User talk:Filmassoc

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Filmassoc! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! Abishe (talk) 19:19, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Getting Started
Getting Help
Policies and Guidelines
The Community
Things to do
Miscellaneous

File:Jithin Majeed Cinematographer.jpg listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Jithin Majeed Cinematographer.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Эlcobbola talk 15:05, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry[edit]

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).

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

Request reason:

I have admitted this is account was accidentally used as a sockpuppet through an AFD nom thread. My web browser had both my accounts stored and interchanged the logins every time I visited the site (unbeknownst to me). I have adhered to all the rules and have caused no harm intentionally, it was just an honest mistake. After the sockpuppetry was brought to my attention I immediately admitted it and brought an explanation as to how it happened via the AFD nom thread. I vow to not repeat this again and be more careful moving forward. filmassoc (talk) 12:48, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

It wasn't just the AfD. The only subject area either account has written about is Jithin Majeed. And frankly, that subject area isn't suitable for Wikipedia. Neither account has contributed anything of value and unblocking either account would not help Wikipedia. Yamla (talk) 11:57, 9 August 2020 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

I would request the admins to reconsider. I fully understand the sockpuppet issue was initiated during the editing of the page 'Jithin Majeed'. I simply implied I had admitted to the fault through the AfD. I have only contributed to that article because these are my first few months of using Wikipedia and I wanted to build practise on one article and then branch out. Now I have come to a point where the article has been deemed TOO SOON and I am unable to even create a draft for it to be considered or appeal the decision with more relevant references. Please understand this scenario and kindly advice. Filmassoc (talk) 19:55, 13 August 2020

Decline reason:

You will not be unblocked to write about Jithin Majeed. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:06, 14 August 2020 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

I would like to request the relevant administrators to give me a second chance. I have abstained from wiki since the block, spent the last few months to reflect on this and am fully understanding of the circumstances under which I was rightfully blocked. I am confident this will not happen again with my account. Will not be editing the previous pages I worked on either. I would like to remain an active contributor to the site fully abiding by the rules and I kindly request the authoritative members to give me a second chance by reinstating my account. Filmassoc (Filmassoc) 06:18, 5 November 2020 (GMT)

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only. This unblock request has been open for more than two weeks but has not proven sufficient for any reviewing administrator to take action. You are welcome to request a new block review if you substantially reword your request. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

  • the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
  • the block is no longer necessary because you
    1. understand what you have been blocked for,
    2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
    3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:47, 5 December 2020 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

I would like to acknowledge that I have been blocked due to using multiple accounts and fully understand the consequences. I have taken half a year away from Wikipedia to fully realise my actions. I will not be using another account other than this one from now on. I guarantee the administrators that I will not be the cause of more damage of disruption to Wikipedia. I have decided to learn more about the site and make valuable contributions moving forward. I request the concerned authorities to kindly release my block so I may better serve this community. Filmassoc (Filmassoc) 09:52, 4 January 2021 (GMT)

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only. This unblock request has been open for more than two weeks but has not proven sufficient for any reviewing administrator to take action. You are welcome to request a new block review if you substantially reword your request. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

  • the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
  • the block is no longer necessary because you
    1. understand what you have been blocked for,
    2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
    3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 14:47, 31 January 2021 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

Hello Admins, I request you to kindly unblock my account. I have understood that I have been blocked for sockpuppetry and stayed away from Wikipedia for 6 months+. The sockpuppetry was a result of two people using the same laptop. I did not know I was logged into the other account. I have understood my mistake and removed the sockpuppet account from my PC. I would like to make valuable contributions to Wiki. Kindly give me a second chance.

Decline reason:

This unblock request has been declined due to your history of vandalism and/or disruption to this encyclopedia. However, we are willing to give you another chance provided that you can earn back the trust of the Wikipedia community. To be unblocked you need to demonstrate that you are willing and able to contribute positively to Wikipedia. You can do this by:

  • Familiarizing yourself with our basic rules.
  • Read our guide to improving articles.
  • Pick any pre-existing article you wish to improve.
  • If you have trouble choosing an article to improve, see this index of articles needing improvement for ideas. Once you have decided on the article you will propose improvements to:
    1. Click the Edit tab at the top of that article;
    2. Copy the portion of the prose from that article that you will be proposing changes to. However:
      • do not copy the "infobox" from the start of the article (i.e., markup like this: {{infobox name|...}});
      • do not copy any image placement code (i.e., markup like this: [[File:Name.jpg|thumb|caption]]);
      • do not copy the page's categories from the bottom of the page (i.e., markup like this: [[Category:Name]]);
      • do not copy the stub tag (if there) from the bottom of the page (i.e., markup like this: {{Foo stub}});
    3. Click edit at your talk page, and paste at the bottom under a new section header (like this: == [[Article title]] ==) the copied content but do not save yet;
    4. Place your cursor in the edit summary box and paste there an edit summary in the following form which specifies the name of the article you copied from and links to it (this is required for mandatory copyright attribution): "Copied content from [[exact Name of Article]]; see that article's history for attribution."
    5. You can now save the page. However, if your edits will include citations to reliable sources (which they should), add the following template to the end of your prose: {{reflist-talk}}. Once you have added the template, click Publish changes.
  • Now, edit that content. Propose significant and well researched improvements by editing the selected portion of the article. Please note that we are not looking for basic typo corrections, or small unreferenced additions; your edits should be substantial, and reflect relevant policies.
  • When you are done with your work, re-request unblocking and an administrator will review your proposed edits.
    • If we (including the original blocking admin) are convinced that your proposed edits will improve Wikipedia as an encyclopedia, you will be unblocked.

If you need help while working with your proposed edits, you may add "{{Help me|your question here ~~~~}}" to your talk page. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 10:06, 20 February 2021 (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.

Nomination of Moksha (2020 film) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Moksha (2020 film) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Moksha (2020 film) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 19:33, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Denny Antwi[edit]

Dennis Agyare Antwi (born 12 January 1993 in Accra), Sunse is a Ghanaian professional footballer, who plays as a striker for Gokulam Kerala F.C. in the I-League.

References

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Filmassoc&oldid=1015742692"