User talk:Baron456

This is Baron456's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kabhi Mein Kabhi Tum (Pakistani Drama) (October 30)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by SafariScribe was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

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.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Kabhi Mein Kabhi Tum (Pakistani Drama) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 09:20, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Baron456! 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! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 09:20, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kabhi Mein Kabhi Tum (Pakistani Drama) (October 31)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Saqib was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
reliable
secondary
independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Kabhi Mein Kabhi Tum (Pakistani Drama) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

— Saqib (talk I contribs) 11:11, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 2024

Hello Baron456. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Draft:Kabhi Mein Kabhi Tum (Pakistani Drama), 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 employed (or being compensated in any way) by a person, group, company or organization to promote their interests. Paid advocacy on Wikipedia must be disclosed even if you have not specifically been asked to edit Wikipedia. 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:Baron456. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Baron456|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. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 11:12, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Saqib, thanks for writing this. No Im not being compensated for the draft in any way. I was just watching the series myself and wanted to find out more about the drama. When I searched the web I was surprised that the drama did not have a wikipedia page despite it being one of the biggest Pakistani TV hits of teh last two decades.

So to reiterate, Im not receiving, have received or will recieve any payment for my draft. Baron456 (talk) 11:46, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Saqib, also if you consider the references, they are not in anyway passing references, they discuss the drama in detail. The drama has been a breakaway hit in Pakistan, India and Bangladesh and each of its episodes has millions of views just on Youtube. Im still trying to write down its plot but i seriously think you should consider accepting the draft as more editors would want to add sections to the article. Baron456 (talk) 11:51, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

by writing the plot i meant putting the story in text for the wiki draft.

Also, many of the references are major, independent English dailies in Pakistan and India. Please consider this. Baron456 (talk) 11:52, 31 October 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:Iam1947 per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/StayCalmOnTress. 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.

Izno (talk) 17:52, 31 October 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).

Baron456 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I think the reason for the block has to do something with the fact that I usually work from an office space that has hundreds of other employees. Im not sure about what sock puppet is but I am sure I have no connection with any other user. It would be great if you consider unblocking my user, if not, it would really be just discouraging.Baron456 (talk) 08:25, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Confirmed sockpuppetry. Your explanation does not match the technical data, but nice try. This attempt to mislead us will make it much harder for you to ever be unblocked on your original account. Yamla (talk) 10:24, 1 November 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.

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).

Baron456 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hi, this is clearly jumping to conclusions. The reason I mentioned in my last appeal is in fact correct, I work at a public university and there are hundreds of users accessing its offices, library and computer labs and other facilities each day, anyone could be the user you mentioned without me ever knowing. How does that make me at fault or a sock puppet? I have no idea how IP addresses work, but I do know that the university has a central command and control over the IT system and that could have contributed to your suspicion. If there is a way for you to ascertain that I'm not an abusing user, please let me know and i will be happy to submit an evidence of your liking. ThanksBaron456 (talk) 08:32, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

There is zero doubt that you are the same user as Iam1947 (talk · contribs) and Textbaron (talk · contribs). After explaining that, you'll have to explain the recreation of the 'Kabhi Mein Kabhi Tum' page, as previous accounts have done. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 10:58, 8 November 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.

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).

Baron456 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Your reason here As I said earlier, you can assume anything you like, but what am I suppose to do to prove I got nothing related to the mentioned accounts? I'm only interested in writing about Pakistani entertainment industry. Kindly help me get this tag off, rather than accusing me of something repeatedly I have no idea about???

Decline reason:

Checkuser verified abuser of multiple accounts. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 15:13, 8 November 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.