User talk:Chandanprabhakar

Welcome!

Hello, Chandanprabhakar, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and has been or will be removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or in other media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles. Additionally, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask a question on your talk page. Again, welcome. ... richi (hello) 11:31, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Chandanprabhakar (January 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 Heliosxeros was:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Chandanprabhakar and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Chandanprabhakar, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and save.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

EROS ^message 03:18, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Chandanprabhakar! Having an article 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! EROS ^message 03:18, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: ID Fresh Food (March 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 Jodi.a.schneider was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

The comment the reviewer left was:

So far no more than routine coverage demonstrated in the article. Further references are needed.

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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:ID Fresh Food and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:ID Fresh Food, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Jodi.a.schneider (talk) 06:14, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Goodera

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 Goodera, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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. Cabayi (talk) 08:40, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Goodera

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 Goodera, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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. Cabayi (talk) 10:55, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

October 2018

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as Goodera, to Wikipedia, as doing so is not in accordance with our policies. For more information about creating articles, you may want to read Wikipedia:Your first article; you might also consider using the Article Wizard. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Cabayi (talk) 10:56, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Username

Welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that your username, "Chandanprabhakar", may not meet Wikipedia's username policy because you share your name with Chandan Prabhakar. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. As an alternative, you may ask for a change of username by completing this form, or you may simply create a new account for editing. Thank you. Cabayi (talk) 11:04, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

October 2018

Hello, Chandanprabhakar. Thank you for helping to build Wikipedia-- the world's largest free content encyclopedia. I'm sorry, but Goodera has been deleted as meeting WP:CSD#G11. "This applies to pages that are exclusively promotional and would need to be fundamentally rewritten to conform with Wikipedia:NOTFORPROMOTION." These must be rewritten from scratch from "reliable, third party sources unconnected to the subject." See WP:RS.

Wikipedia:Identifying blatant advertising#Typical signs of blatant advertising contains information about content to avoid. For more information on content that may be perceived as promotional, click User:Dlohcierekim/promo. These are just rough guides. Pages can avoid all those pitfalls and still be glaringly obvious ad copy. Sometimes pages meeting WP:CSD#G11 give the appearance of an editor violating Wikipedia:Conflict of interest or WP:PAID. Please read and heed them if they apply to you. Please read Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations.

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia-- subjects must meet notability guidelines with reliable sources that are unconnected with the subject and providing verifiable information. That generally means someone unconnected with the subject needs to have written a great deal about the subject. Please see Wikipedia:Citing sources . Template:cite has templates you can use in citing your sources. Place the template {{references}} at the bottom of the page, and references cited in the text will appear there.

If you want to try again, please use the Article Wizard or articles for creation to guide you through the creation process. The new user tutorial can help you avoid future problems.

You may find this tool useful: Google custom search Don't feel discouraged. My first attempts at creating articles were deleted too.

There is more information at Wikipedia:Community portal. There is help available at THE TEAHOUSE. Cheers, and happy editing. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 13:47, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: User:Chandanprabhakar/sandbox has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at User:Chandanprabhakar/sandbox. Thanks! -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 14:49, 6 November 2018 (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/AnjaliDas10, 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.

Cabayi (talk) 14:51, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS appeal #76083

is closed.

I'm sorry, but I cannot unblock you at this time. Please concisely and clearly describe how your editing merited a block, what you would do differently, and what constructive edits you would make. Please read Wikipedia's Guide to appealing blocks for more information. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Guide_to_appealing_blocks) As you still have access to your talk page, please post your unblock request to your user talk page, omitting any off-Wiki personally identifying information. If you have not already done so, please place the following at the bottom of your talk page, filling in "Your reason here "

 {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 02:02, 14 July 2023 (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).

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

Request reason:

Your reason here User:chandanprabhakar, which was imposed due to an investigation into sockpuppetry and potential promotion on the Draft:Goodera page. First and foremost, I want to express my sincere remorse for any actions that might have inadvertently violated Wikipedia's policies. As an enthusiastic contributor to the Wikipedia community, I acknowledge that I may have made some errors in judgment, leading to the current situation. I take full responsibility for my actions and understand the importance of adhering to Wikipedia's guidelines to maintain the integrity of this valuable platform.

Upon careful reflection and reviewing Wikipedia's policies, I now recognize the significance of avoiding any behaviors that could be perceived as sockpuppetry or promotion. I deeply regret any actions that may have raised suspicions in this regard and assure you that there was no intention to engage in such behavior.

The Draft:Goodera page was an area of genuine interest for me, and my intent was solely to contribute valuable content to enrich the knowledge. I understand that coincidental timing with the account User:AnjaliDas10's activity may have raised concerns, but I want to emphasize that I had no knowledge or involvement in any sockpuppetry or coordination.

Since the block was implemented, I have not attempted to edit or contribute further, respecting the administrator's decision and using this time to better understand Wikipedia's guidelines. I am now more aware than ever of the importance of transparent and constructive contributions to this community-driven platform.

If my account, User:chandanprabhakar, is unblocked, I commit wholeheartedly to using this second chance to contribute positively to Wikipedia. I will diligently avoid any activities that could raise suspicions or compromise the integrity of Wikipedia. My sole focus will be on accurate information, fostering a collaborative environment, and making valuable contributions to the community.

I understand the seriousness of the situation, and I genuinely seek an opportunity to learn from this experience and demonstrate my unwavering commitment to Wikipedia's values. I believe in the power of knowledge sharing and the positive impact of Wikipedia on people worldwide.

Thank you for considering my appeal. I hope you will find it in your heart to grant me this opportunity to once again contribute responsibly and positively to Wikipedia. If you require any further information or clarification, I am more than willing to provide it. Chandanprabhakar (talk) 23:23, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am summarily declining this request because it was clearly written by an AI. It's not the AI that is blocked, it is you. We want to hear from you. Please write a request in your own words without the aid of an AI. 331dot (talk) 07:34, 27 July 2023 (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).

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

Request reason:

I understand that I have been blocked for Sock Puppet. But I really did not have any connect neither do I have access to multiple accounts, user:chandanprabhakar is the only account that I have used so far. I genuinely apologize for not adhering to the policies of Wiki Pedia and creating content that seemed promotional. I will not repeat my mistakes if I'm unblocked and given another chance. I will only make valuable, insightful and informative edits going forward, refrain from making promotional content, or be penalized for acts like Sock Puppet (I will not manipulate public opinion, use a false identity, or be influenced by anyone to make any edits they may request). I'm sorry for using AI to place unblock request. It is a humble request to please unblock me so that I can positively contribute to this community. If I have missed any further clarifications, please let me know and I will be happy to provide it.

Decline reason:

This does not address the concerns raised at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/AnjaliDas10/Archive. Yamla (talk) 16:35, 28 July 2023 (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).

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

Request reason:

I completely understand and acknowledge that I have been blocked for Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/AnjaliDas10/Archive but I genuinely do not own the Users:AnjaliDas10. The only account that I have is user:chandanprabhakar. I understand the concern raised under this investigation, but I do not know how I can provide proof to justify my stand. Can you please help with how can I provide proof for the same?

Please include a decline or accept reason.

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 is not formatted as an unblock request. See WP:GAB to understand how to write an unblock request. Regardless, your argument is not relevant. See WP:MEAT. --Yamla (talk) 16:51, 28 July 2023 (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).

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

Request reason:

I understand the reason for me being blocked is for Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/AnjaliDas10/Archive This block is "unfair" as I did not practice in any such act. Can you please give me a reason apart from being a sleeper (is it not justified that life gets busy at times, and we all tend to lose track? Okay, let me not talk for all; let me talk for myself. I went into depression and didn't feel like doing anything for a while. Even with these requests that I have been making after a very long time, which fall under the sleeper category, I have my reason for not being constantly active. Is there any concrete proof that can be provided that I have been involved in Sockpuppet or Meatpuppetry? If so, then I would like to learn more about it.

Decline reason:

I looked at deleted versions of the Goodera article created by Chandanprabhakar and AnjaliDas10, and the text is almost identical in the two versions. Per WP:DUCK, I agree with the blocking admin and the sockpuppet investigation that these two accounts are working together either as a sock puppet or meat puppet. Unblock requests will need to specifically address the connection between these two accounts and why the promotional material in the drafts was inappropriate. Z1720 (talk) 13:22, 31 July 2023 (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.