Jump to content

User talk:ShriBalajji

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Greenman were:  The comment the reviewer left was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
Greenman (talk) 22:04, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
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)[reply]

May 2023

[edit]

Information icon 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)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

[edit]

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:

  • adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
  • comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
  • follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
  • comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
  • refrain from gaming the system.

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)[reply]

May 2023

[edit]

is closed. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 02:22, 21 May 2023 (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).

ShriBalajji (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (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)[reply]

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)[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.

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.