User talk:Anupritaisno1

Hello. The nickname Anupritaisno1 is a known contributor to GrapheneOS which represents a Conflict of Interest for editing CopperheadOS.

"Anupritaisno1 github activity".

Hello, Anupritaisno1. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:Spam);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you.

Edit warring on CopperheadOS

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on CopperheadOS; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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.

Points to note:

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 and 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.Note that removing edits (within an hour of a protected-page status change no less) could be considered engaging in Edit Warring.

The article that was retracted has been removed from the wiki with no evidence of Libel engaged on the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.136.112.222 (talk) 16:19, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am not affiliated to grapheneos, nor am I paid by or work for them. I do accept I have a contributor tag but I have made no contributions to the project so far. I can confirm I am editing in good faith with no bias. You can verify that I don't have any real contributions to the project. I am currently self-employed, I do not have an employer and my current company is an LLC completely unrelated to grapheneos not even running in the same continent as grapheneos

Also see the reasons given by the actual IP participating in the edit war Anupritaisno1 (talk) 16:27, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'd also like to add that the whole issue between copperhead and Mr.Micay was something that came from a primary source. It hasn't been confirmed that this is what actually happened and all sources that claim it did are just circular sources coming from copperheadOS. Until this is confirmed this is just speculation and should not be on Wikipedia Anupritaisno1 (talk) 16:33, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also this is the source link for copperheadOS from the cited build guide the other IP keeps reverting to gitlab.com/copperheadsec/copperhead-source-partner-access/manifest.git

This isn't open source and only available for partners. So saying it is open source is not true The android headlines link is also a dead link and cannot be considered as source Anupritaisno1 (talk) 16:59, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi the page has been edited and I don't have any objections with the current version. I will not be editing the page again unless I notice any actual vandalism Anupritaisno1 (talk) 18:18, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

CopperheadOS

Hi Anupritaisno1, I noticed that you made two reverts in the last 24 hours over at CopperheadOS. If you haven't already read it, please take a look at the three-revert rule - reverting more than three times in the same 24-hour period on a single article will probably get you blocked from editing, and you can still be sanctioned for reverting less times than that if an administrator thinks that you are edit warring. I won't be doing any blocking myself, as I am pretty much involved with the Copperhead 3-P issue now, but I can't say how other administrators will react, so in my opinion it's a good idea to play it safe. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 13:45, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure you know deep down there are many other than yae4 who disagree with yae's change

Confirmation by a government authority or by a business registry is valid evidence

I shall tag User:Autobotsrepair and User: Pitchcurve who definitely feel the same Anupritaisno1 (talk) 01:00, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

== Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

==

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

-- Yae4 (talk) 14:30, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

us indeed

There's only one person stirring up drama. I can count at least 3 people except me who disagree with your edit Anupritaisno1 (talk) 01:02, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Anupritaisno1. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page CopperheadOS, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:Spam);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. I believe you have Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest#apparentCOI on GrapheneOS and CopperheadOS. You have acknowledged a connection with GrapheneOS, but it appears to me your connection and involvement are closer than you have said. This is based both on the nature of your edits, and other information. Yae4 (talk) 03:45, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yae4 it's hilarious how when you don't get your way you accuse others of COI.

Please also feel free to open a COI page on Mr. Stradivarius, Pictchvurve and Autobotsrepair page as well. Let's see how they respond

Nothing is going to come out of this bogus and utterly baseless claim. Have a nice day Anupritaisno1 (talk) 08:21, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Anupritaisno1: The facts are not on your side. I commented on COI issues before making any changes other than removing the Liliputing source, a second time, due to previous non-reliability consensus. Your close connections to GrapheneOS and its developer are obvious to the casual web searcher. In my opinion, you should probably stop using this alias at least on GrapheneOS or CopperheadOS. -- Yae4 (talk) 16:05, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That aside, how do you link stuff that way? Sorry I sometimes can be an idiot when it comes to tech Anupritaisno1 (talk) 18:19, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Strcat, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

Yae4 (talk) 01:34, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I'll admit to a COI with glassrom which was a spinoff of grapheneos

I use the same name on all platforms and really this has gone too far

I'll get a few things straight I definitely have a COI when it comes to glassrom but I don't exactly have any relationship whatsoever with grapheneos. I merely take their code, make my changes and sell it to a company for profit. Yes. I am an ***hole who sells other's code

I do not know who strcat is nor do I have any relationship whatsoever with grapheneos or strcat. I can also prove to you that I am not strcat. Please see my user profile on XDA and github where I use the same username

I have always edited from a single IP: 86.105.51.194 and I am the owner of this IP. I can also prove to you that I have owned this IP for more than a year now and that none of the other people in the sock list have ever known or used this IP Anupritaisno1 (talk) 03:20, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

https://forum.xda-developers.com/oneplus-7-pro/development/9-glassrom-t3987291/post80607629#post80607629 https://mobile.twitter.com/anupritaisno1?lang=en https://github.com/anupritaisno1

Here are some links proving that I am not strcat and a real person Anupritaisno1 (talk) 03:21, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I'll just admit to it

Hi I'll admit to a COI with glassrom which was a spinoff of grapheneos

I use the same name on all platforms and really this has gone too far

I'll get a few things straight I definitely have a COI when it comes to glassrom which is a spinoff of grapheneos. I merely take their code, make my changes and sell it to a company for profit. So yes I do have a COI indirectly when it comes to grapheneos

I have not coordinated any edits to Wikipedia with strcat. I can also prove to you that I am not strcat. Please see my user profile on XDA and github where I use the same username

I have always edited from a single IP: 86.105.51.194 and I am the owner of this IP. I can also prove to you that I have owned this IP for more than a year now and that none of the other people in the sock list have ever known or used this IP

I edited the article purely for my own interest and I will admit to that. I am sorry and I won't do it again Anupritaisno1 (talk) 03:22, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Apology for SPI

I apologize for accusing Anupritaisno1, Autobotsrepair and Pitchcurve of being Sockpuppets of Strcat. I note the determination said, "The active accounts are Unrelated. No comment on Strcat, which appears to have been abandoned." Meaning Hmm. -- Yae4 (talk) 21:17, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]