User talk:2006nishan178713/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

A belated welcome

Welcome!

Hello, 2006nishan178713, and Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay.

Here are some pages you might find helpful: Wikipedia Tutorial The five pillars of Wikipedia How to: edit a page • upload an image How to write a great article Simplified Manual of Style Your first article Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community If you have any questions, ask at the Teahouse and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.

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 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.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian. If you need any other help, leave me a message on my talk page.

~ ToBeFree (talk) 13:46, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for helping. Partha Basak 14:31, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Natural resources of Bhutan

Hello 2006nishan178713,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Natural resources of Bhutan for deletion, because it seems to be copied from another source, probably infringing copyright.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to rewrite it in your own words, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

DanCherek (talk) 15:32, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Probably yes User:2006nishan178713 15:34, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Please do not review your own articles that are flagged in CopyPatrol, and don't copy material from other websites into Wikipedia. DanCherek (talk) 15:36, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

November 2021

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing certain namespaces ((Article) and Draft) for copyright violations.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Moneytrees🏝️^{Talk/CCI guide} 15:57, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

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).

2006nishan178713 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I have understood my fault and would never do it again and I have thoroughly read the Copyright Policies. I did not have a proper knowledge about the copyright policies prior violating but now after reading the policies once again, I clearly understood the importance of creative writing and the consequences of copyright violations. I totally regret my violations now. I will surely change from now, seeking more information from independent sources and writing them in my own way. I agree that I had made a huge mistake by copying copyrighted content. It's quite clear to me now how to handle copyrighted material. I would highly appreciate getting an unban which would help me continue my Wikipedia journey and I promise that I would never violate the copyright policies and always take a detailed look at all of my edits to prevent any further errors. Thanks!User:2006nishan178713 16:33, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Hi 2006nishan178713,

There was a kind and detailed analysis of multiple copyright issues on 29 October 2021, as pointed out by Moneytrees below. You had been explicitly informed that "you should not edit any more until you have taken the time to read and understand our copyright policy", with a link to the section about reusing content from others. You have been informed about the copyright FAQ page which explains that if you are in doubt about the copyright status of a work, you should assume that you can not use it on Wikipedia. Of course, both the policy and the FAQ contain a lot of boring and hard-to-understand details, but in general, the following part of Moneytree's message is important: "All text must be written in your own words." The general idea is: Do not copy content from somewhere else to Wikipedia. This should have been very clear even in case of misunderstandings about specific details of the copyright policy. You have been asked not to copy text from other websites in the future, and you have provided a kind and commendable response in Special:Diff/1052613780 assuring your understanding. About 10 days later, you have created Natural resources of Bhutan, full of copied paragraphs. It is hard to interpret this as a genuine misunderstanding; doing this after being informed about copyright issues makes an impression of having plagiarized others' content on purpose. In any case, the previous assurance sadly had no actual meaning.

With this in mind, there are two possible paths to being unblocked:

• If you have knowingly added a copyright violation to Wikipedia, any future unblock request has to explicitly acknowledge this act of intentional plagiarism, and needs to contain a credible reason why after such a breach of trust, you can be trusted again.
• If the copyright violation is a result of a genuine misunderstanding, any future unblock request must clearly and credibly explain what led to this misunderstanding, and why after such a severe failure to understand a basic requirement, you can be trusted to follow similar requirements in the future.

Each option is currently almost impossible to take. Time is an important factor: There is no time limit for creating an unblock request, and we assume that people can learn and change over time. You may need to wait multiple months, or possibly even a few years, until you can credibly say that you have changed and would like to request a second chance. Please don't rush this; you're currently probably not ready for creating the next unblock request.

Best regards,
~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:33, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

---

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).

2006nishan178713 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I deeply regret my actions now. I am requesting for a single chance to correct myself. I acknowledge that the paragraphs were intentionally copied from the website as they were accurate, unknowing of the facts of the strict copyright policies of Wikipedia. I currently have understood the copyright policies. This kind of breach of trust will never be done again as I have clearly realised my mistakes. Please give me another chance and if I do any mistakes regarding copyright you can permanently block me. A single chance would be highly appreciated User:2006nishan178713 05:58, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Procedural close for this request because there's another active unblock request further down the page. -- Euryalus (talk) 00:34, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

---

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.

I have blocked you as the result of the above section; the article was mostly unedited sections of https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/what-are-the-natural-resources-of-bhutan.html. I previously warned you about 8 different copyright violations and said "Further copyright issues will result in you being blocked from editing". If you want to be unblocked, you will have to demonstrate a better understanding of copyright and an understanding not to copy from sources. Moneytrees🏝️^{Talk/CCI guide} 16:01, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

I am really sorry. I underestimated copyright violations. I promise I would never do it again. I have now gone through WP:COPYRIGHT and have understood it. I realized my problem by reading WP:COPYOTHERS.

Please give another chance to correct myself.

Thanks. User:2006nishan178713 16:13, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

I think this appeal might end up being declined. It would probably help you if you were a little more specific with what you would do different, and how you would specifically avoid instances where you copied in something word for word. Moneytrees🏝️^{Talk/CCI guide} 17:27, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

If he wants another chance, give him that chance. WP:ROPE? Declining unblocks isn't helpful. Maybe this thing will solve everything for him. Earwig's Copyvio Detector. It surely did for me.:)--Filmomusico (talk) 16:56, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

What is particularly troubling, even more so than the copyright violations themselves, was that 2006nishan178713 appeared to notice that a bot had flagged their article for potential copyvio, logged into the copyright patrolling interface, and marked their own article as "no action needed", which seems like a clear attempt to evade scrutiny. I agree with ToBeFree's advice. DanCherek (talk) 17:03, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

@DanCherek: Can you provide prove of that? I don't know how it works on deleted articles.--Filmomusico (talk) 17:44, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

This is my first time doing this kind of mistake. I had intentionally reviewed my article which I am really sorry for. Please give me a single chance to correct myself, I promise I would never do it again. And if I do, administrators are free to block me permanently. Please!

Good Day! User:2006nishan178713 18:02, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

I guess, stuff happens. We all need to assume good faith of the editor and give him rope.--Filmomusico (talk) 18:15, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

The problem is, the user did have multiple second chances already. The initial warning about multiple copyright violations by Moneytrees was a second chance offer. Five days later, Nanda Devi Plutonium Mission was created with copied content. I have noticed and highlighted this issue using "mark" HTML tags (usually a yellow background) at "Nanda Devi Plutonium Mission" after a request for feedback. The issue was addressed by 2006nishan178713 on the same day. Five further days later, Natural resources of Bhutan was copy-pasted together from Britannica and World Atlas. If it was an intentional attempt of deception, the trust is currently too broken for an unblock. If it was an accident, the competence is currently too low for an unblock. This is not "stuff happens", this is "some people should currently not edit Wikipedia". ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:57, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

@ToBeFree: If he is blocked indefinitely how will he prove that his edit habbits have changed in say a month or so?--Filmomusico (talk) 19:10, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

Filmomusico, As described in the decline explanation, we assume that people can learn and change over time. 2006nishan178713 has proven that 10 days were not enough time for this process to happen, yet requests an unblock less than 60 minutes after the block notification, and less than half a day after the previous decline. An often-used, tried-and-tested approach is the "standard offer", which proposes 6 months. It does not have to be 6 months in this case here, but certainly more than a day or two. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:15, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

@ToBeFree: Well ok, lets say he will issue an unblock request in 2 day time, will you assume good faith? I personally believe that an oversight will be required for any future edits by this editor. :)--Filmomusico (talk) 19:23, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

The unblock request is still active. Please unblock me. I would never do it again, as stated earlier User:2006nishan178713 18:42, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Believe in me, I will never do this kind of things again.

I would be happy to get an oversight by someone who could monitor my edits User:2006nishan178713 11:14, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, I am leaving Wikipedia as of now. User:2006nishan178713 05:24, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

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).

2006nishan178713 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I deeply regret my actions now. I am requesting for a single chance to correct myself. I acknowledge that the paragraphs were intentionally copied from the website as they were accurate, unknowing of the facts of the strict copyright policies of Wikipedia. I currently have understood the copyright policies. This kind of breach of trust will never be done again as I have clearly realised my mistakes. Please give me another chance and if I do any mistakes regarding copyright you can permanently block me. A single chance would be highly appreciated User:2006nishan178713 05:58, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Too many failed second chances for this block to be lifted at present. Apply again in a few months. In the interim if you'd like to demonstrate your understanding of Wikipedia's copyright policies, you might consider creating a non-copied article in your sandbox as an indciation of what kind of editing you'd do if the block was lifted. Note this is not a formal requirement for an unblock but might help in demonstrating good faith. -- Euryalus (talk) 00:55, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

---

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.

You've had your "single chance" multiple times, as described above. I'm starting to repeat myself. While you're waiting, please inform yourself about the difference between a block and a ban. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:06, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Question for administrator

Please review my unblock request--User:2006nishan178713 14:36, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Your request is open and visible to administrators. Further requests will not speed up the process. Please be patient. 331dot (talk) 16:14, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Head of Departments

Hi, I happened to be reading a help page archive and I saw this: "names of the "Head of Departments (HOD)" of the subjects taught in ABN Seal College" where you asked about putting the names into an article.

I'm "just" another editor, but in my opinion, information like that can get out of date after a while. Will you update the article each time there is a change? For the next 20 years or so?

I don't want to sound discouraging, but among the 6 million articles at Wikipedia, many of them likely have information that was correct when it was added... but some people lose interest, or drift away, and information like that gradually "becomes wrong". If a reader really wants info like that, the college's own web site is a much better place for them to look, and in my opinion, it doesn't need to be in the WP article.

Just something to think about. Thanks. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 05:05, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

True Indeed 2006nishan178713 05:30, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Nanda Devi Plutonium Mission

Hmm--after all the copy edits I had to make, I run into a phrase that in your first version was unverified--look for "spirited". Turns out, it's from the Wired article. You created that article on 5 November 2021, a few days before your block. You know, you could have helped your case by indicating where and when you had committed those infractions. Drmies (talk) 22:17, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

As mentioned before, I didn't know clearly about the copyright policies here. I totally forgot about that case you have mentioned above. Anyways, I am getting some experience by contributing to Wikinews and Wikivoyage. Regards! 2006nishan178713^t@lk 04:42, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Board Of Revenue, Rajasthan moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Board Of Revenue, Rajasthan, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:00, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Okay! It was a translation from hindi to english 2006nishan178713^t@lk 16:40, 19 January 2022 (UTC)