User talk:Amma&Papa

Priyanka Choudhary

Please don't edit unnecessary things in Priyanka Choudhary page, they will restrict from editing or delete the page in the future, so please stop. Shipa.l9 (talk) 20:15, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Adrija Roy for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Adrija Roy 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/Adrija Roy (3rd nomination) 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 until the discussion has finished.

Star Mississippi 14:03, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Priyanka Choudhary

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Priyanka Choudhary requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Priyanka Choudhary (2nd nomination). When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Broc (talk) 11:07, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Normally I'd suggest creating a draft on the subject and submitting it, but based on the log entries at Draft:Priyanka Choudhary and the indicated history of repeated recreations of an article on her, that's not going to work here. If you want to discuss the matter and explain what's changed since the last AfD (2022), I'll be glad to ping some of the admins involved in closing the AfD and deleting the draft and get them to chime in on what you'll need to demonstrate. —C.Fred (talk) 11:17, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question regarding WP:Terms of use compliance

Regarding this edit, and in particular this text:

We (I am using we because we are five editors who create new articles of actors, shows and films, we are not paid for that but we still do it out of passion and our common interest in entertainment industry. This is the only account we have because my other editor friends do not know how to handle a Wikipedia account well).

The terms of use are clear: one person per account. Please confirm that only one person will be using this account going forward (if more than one has been using it in the past). —C.Fred (talk) 12:25, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I'm sorry Sir. We did not essentially know about WP:Terms of use. Although we work together for creating articles, like finding the right information, the right resources, etc. I'm the only editor who uses this account. If you want my personal details, then I am Ritika Roy who is a student of Ph.d in Korean in Delhi University. Only I use this account. Amma&Papa (talk) 12:41, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April 2024

Hello Amma&Papa. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Amma&Papa. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Amma&Papa|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. Thanks, Please feel free to ping/mention -- User4edits (T) 12:48, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@User4edits No I'm not paid for my edits in Wikipedia. I had stated that there are 5 of us (editors in Wikipedia) who work together to create new articles on Indian television shows and actors. However, none other than me handles this account. The five of us met during a conference in Delhi University and decided to edit in Wikipedia. Later, we realised we have a common interest in Indian television industry so I created this account and in the timespan of 1.5 years learnt how to use it. I assure that even though we work together for creating new articles only I have the password of this account. Plus, all the five of us are University students in Delhi and are not paid in favour of any of our edits.Amma&Papa (talk) 10:50, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reply. Please maintain NPOV in your edits and actions. Best wishes, Thanks, Please feel free to ping/mention -- User4edits (T) 11:02, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@User4edits Okay Sir/Ma'am I will maintain WP:NPOV and also ask my other friends to do the same. Thank you so much for your wishes ❤️. Amma&Papa (talk) 11:20, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Other accounts

Hello Amma&Papa, I noticed that you used the terms "me and my friends" and "we" multiple times, so I'm curious to know who they are. Would you mind sharing their usernames? In one of your most recent edits, you stated, "...myself and my other editor friends, none of us will appeal for recreation of Priyanka Choudhary's article till next April." This implies that they also edit Wikipedia. Since you know each other off-wiki, it's important to disclose their usernames on your userpage to avoid any misunderstanding of sockpuppetry. Thank you, GSS ^💬 18:36, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear @GSS, myself Ritika Roy. I'm doing my Ph.d in Korean from Delhi University. I'm the only one who uses this account. My other editor friends are Dhrishti, Saumya, Parul and Bulbul. We met during a conference in my university. All the five of us work together to create new wikipedia articles but only I have an account which is this one Amma&Papa. Although, we work together none other than me has the password for this account. Dhrishti, Saumya, Parul and Bulbul edit anonymously because they feel comfortable working with an anonymous identity. Right now, they are busy with their thesis work so they do not come to Wikipedia much right now. Although I joined Wikipedia in 2022, I wasn't much aware on how to work here which is why I wasn't much active here. However, I will be taking a hiatus again after creating actress Srishti Singh's article because even I have to focus on my thesis. Is there anything else that I should disclose?Amma&Papa (talk) 06:36, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You mentioned that when you first registered, you were not familiar with how things work here. However, I'm curious about how you were able to create a perfectly formatted article, which was your eleventh edit. The article was perfectly formatted, suggesting a strong grasp of policies, particularly regarding actors. Additionally, considering your statement about your 'friends' who edit anonymously, I recommend familiarizing yourself with WP:SOCK to understand the guidelines. GSS ^💬 14:12, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I had taken help from my other editor friends to create that article. And they were the ones who taught me how things work in Wikipedia. Amma&Papa (talk) 15:04, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As of now, I am not a WP:Sock. But I honestly don't know anything much about my editor friends, because I hardly meet them, we study in different universities. They informed me that they don't want to create an account because they want to edit anonymously. I swear, I don't know what is the reason behind that decision. Amma&Papa (talk) 15:08, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, considering your statement about your 'friends' who edit anonymously, I recommend familiarizing yourself with WP:SOCK to understand the guidelines. So does that mean I have to break friendship with them?Amma&Papa (talk) 15:11, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

May I know if this is you or one of your friends? GSS ^💬 15:20, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, I don't know if it's one of my friends even though I was the one who created Adrija Roy's article. I didn't create Adrija Roy's article on my own. I created with the help of my friends. We usually work on Word and share with each other through e-mail. So, most of times, I don't know who has contributed how and what for an article. Amma&Papa (talk) 16:16, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively as a sockpuppet of User:Creativitylove per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Creativitylove. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

Spicy (talk) 15:28, 30 April 2024 (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).

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

Request reason:

Hi, all I wanted to do is to edit constructively in Wikipedia. I have never used this account to abuse anyone nor to edit unconstructively. If you check my edit history I have always edited in good faith, so can you please give one chance and unblock me? I will have no issues if you block me when I would commit any mistake which User:Creativitylove or User:Commonedits commited in Wikipedia. Amma&Papa (talk) 06:52, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This does not address the reason for the block. 331dot (talk) 08:22, 11 July 2024 (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.

@User:331dot Then what should I do to get unblocked? Amma&Papa (talk) 08:59, 11 July 2024 (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).

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

Request reason:

I will not create multiple accounts and abuse them going against the rules of Wikipedia. Can you please unblock me? Amma&Papa (talk) 09:12, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Please make your request on your original account. There, you'll need to do more than just promise to stop, you'll need to address your multiple years of violations. Yamla (talk) 10:28, 11 July 2024 (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.

You'll also need to address your deliberate malicious attempt to lie to us. This will be difficult; you've gone out of your way to demonstrate you cannot be trusted. --Yamla (talk) 10:29, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Yamla I can't edit and send a unblock request from the account User:Commonedits as that account is blocked from editing Wikipedia completely. Please enable editing for User:Commonedits first only then I will be able to place an unblock request. Amma&Papa (talk) 10:46, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No. Use WP:UTRS. Note any UTRS request that doesn't address your malicious attempt to mislead us and/or doesn't address your sockpuppetry and/or doesn't address your blatant personal attacks will likely be speedily declined. --Yamla (talk) 11:20, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Yamla Done✔ Amma&Papa (talk) 14:44, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]