User talk:VismayH

VismayH, you are invited to the Teahouse![edit]

Hi VismayH! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Lightbreather (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 17:21, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion[edit]

This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident in which you may be involved. Thank you. Brianhe (talk) 17:09, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

October 2015[edit]

Hello, I'm I dream of horses. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard— because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. I dream of horses If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{Ping|I dream of horses}} to your message. ^{(talk to me) (contributions)} @ 17:32, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

November 2015[edit]

Your recent edit to S. P. Jain Institute of Management and Research appears to have added the name of a non-notable entity to a list that normally includes only notable entries. In general, a person or organization added to a list should have a pre-existing article before being added to most lists. If you wish to create such an article, please first confirm that the subject qualifies for a separate, stand-alone article according to Wikipedia's notability guideline. Thank you. NeilN ^{talk to me} 07:34, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. DMacks (talk) 08:43, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Are you reading these messages at all? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 08:44, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits[edit]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 08:58, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

S P Jain Institute Alumni[edit]

Notability of individuals such as this are determined by the presence of Wikipedia articles about them. In their articles, there would also need to be sourcing that they went to this school. See below for your list. The ones that are blue links could be possibly added:

Vinay Raghunath Shetty, Rajesh Arun Jejurikar, Madan A. Padaki, Lulu Raghavan, Sunil S Rao, Sangeeta Chawla, Ritu Arora, Jawahar Bekay, Amitabh Bhargava, Chetan Gore, Gautam Bhattacharya, Ranjan Bhattacharya, Arvind Bindra, Shrinath Bolloju, Suveer Chainani, Vineet Chhatwal, Thyagarajan Dasaratharaman, Keshav Gaur, Samir Joshipura, Rajiv Kochhar, Advait Kurlekar, Sunil Lulla, Harish Menon, Lovaii Navlakhi, Rajesh Panda, Rajiv Rajgopal, Anand Rangachary, Mihir Shah, Arvind Sharma, Guneet Singh, Aruna Daryanani, Ramraj Pai, Pradeep kar, Santosh parulekar, Kaustubh Dhavse, Sashi Shankar, Megha Mehra --‖ Ebyabe ^talk - Repel All Boarders ‖ 09:16, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that only Sunil Lulla has a source in the article that they went to S P Jain. The other blue links don't mention the school at all. --‖ Ebyabe ^talk - Inspector General ‖ 09:17, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, sir! Have noted your recommendations, and will make changes accordingly.

Nice job Ebyabe. Note the other three bluelinks are likely completely other people. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 09:25, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I guess they aren't exactly the wiki page of Alumni of SP Jain. I defer to your judgement. So is there no way in which the alumni can be included? Other colleges have them, without sufficient notability.

If other college articles have redlinked alumni they should probably be removed. Do you have examples? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 09:33, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

They have lesser redlinks that blue-ones. So a wiki page is a must in this case? No external link would do?

You must provide links that show the person is notable according to WP:BIO. This means no LinkedIn, Facebook, company, press release, etc., etc., links. The references must be independent of the subject (see WP:BASIC). Essentially the sources you provide must show the person should have an article. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 09:46, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet of Spjimr (talk · contribs · global contribs · page moves · user creation · block log) that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. —SpacemanSpiff 14:56, 26 November 2015 (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).

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

Request reason:

I was a student of the institute, and I was updating the page with relevant information, I was also new at the task. Sorry for not doing it correctly, though I don't believe I added any wrong or misleading information. I do not admit to wrongdoing, I only admit for being a noob at the task. Right now I am exploring Delhi, and have added pictures of various monuments on Wikimedia Commons. So please unblock me, so that my effort doesn't go to a waste.

Decline reason:

You'll have to explain this. Huon (talk) 00:05, 7 September 2016 (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).

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

Request reason:

It was my task to update the list of all the alumni of the college and put it on the page to stay relevant. Now, before starting on the endeavor, I didn't realize that they need to have their own Wikipedia pages, nor did I know that I would need a lot of articles in relevant sources which say that 'this guy was great and he was from this college' - that's why I updated the names of the people who 'ACTUALLY ARE' part of my college's alumni network but I couldn't furnish the relevant proof. So I wasn't lying or trying to glamorize the truth - I just didn't know the process. I also engaged in 'edit wars' because I was getting irritated when they called me a liar and a 'sock puppet' for my college. In retrospect, I realize I shouldn't have done that - I apologize. But you guys need to give people a chance before condemning them to be guilty. It depends on you now - frankly, I am not longer going to edit on my college page nor am I going to engage in any edit that seems suspicious. That's all I have to say in my defense. Regards......VismayH

Decline reason:

You still haven't explained this (click the blue word "this" in case you're not sure what I'm referring to). Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:20, 7 September 2016 (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).

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

Request reason:

Okay, you can see that I came on scene in October 2015 - My name is Vismay Harani, the other guy is Anadi Chaturvedi - we both made the edits by sitting together on two different laptops, and were trying to teach each other along the way. Before October 2015, I really don't know who those guys are - there is a PR Committee in college, the 'Hrish' one I think is 'Hrishika', I don't know who 'SPJIMReditor' is - but because you have located us in the same location - is because we are part of the same University Campus. If I had opened multiple accounts, why would I be asking you to revive my old account - currently I am located in a different geographical location, I could have created another fake account. You can search my profile and Anadi's profile on Facebook - we are from the same college. We are friends, but we aren't the same person. My Facebook public page is ' https://www.facebook.com/vismaythevirus ', similarly you can check for Anadi Chaturvedi (if in the next review you require me to prove this, I am ready to do that as well - but you can easily find him). If you feel I am the guilty party, then review the next few edits that I make and then judge accordingly. I can furnish my personal details now & if you had just asked me then, I could have shared it.

Decline reason:

You are missing the point. See WP:MEAT. It makes no difference whatsoever that you are two individual people, what matters is your editing. Yamla (talk) 10:39, 8 September 2016 (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).

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

Request reason:

There is one SPJIMR page, it was quite old. We had to carry out a lot of edits, we divided the portions as to what each guy will do. We didn't know how to add or delete the photo - we were unable to delete a photos of a "tree" which shouldn't have appeared in the College Wiki page. We were grappling and teaching each other along the way. I was not using him as a prop for bolstering my edit. There were two bones of contention: 1) Addition of Margaret Thatcher photo when she inaugurated our College ( http://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/104629 ) - our college was then known as Bhartiya Vidya Bhavan Institute of Management studies. 2) The other was adding of the alumni list which I have already mentioned. It is over a year now that you have indefinitely barred my account - I am telling I won't repeat the mistakes. This is as far as I know about editing. I am constantly learning. One thing I have definitely learned is not to get impatient and engage in edit wars just because I feel I am right. There is a proper protocol in place, which I have to follow. Also I need to back up my edits with relevant and authentic sources.

Decline reason:

It is perfectly clear that you are here for the purpose of using Wikipedia for marketing and what you call "PR" for an institution you are connected to. That in itself is enough reason for you to be blocked, apart from your attacking one or more editors you disagreed with, your edit-warring, and your attempts to tell other editors that they must not edit, as though you think you and your colleagues own the article in question. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 14:25, 9 September 2016 (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).

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

Request reason:

I did it, and I admitted as much in the last 4 posts. All I argued was that the things I edited weren't INCORRECT, and however much you bash me, I am not going to apologize for that. I didn't do it in the right way, I am really sorry for that. I have been downright wrong in the way I did it - I am no longer going to edit any page about any Organization I am affiliated with. It has been a year already - me or my "friends" at PR no longer do that job. If you don't find my apology worthy of your stature, just say "No", so that we can both move on with life. I am not going to beg in front of you guys - nor I would allow you to cast me as a criminal in this trial with angry jury. So good bye, and have a good life!

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. 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. PhilKnight (talk) 23:48, 9 September 2016 (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.