User talk:Sairg

Missing reference

The reference to the citation, Phukan 2017, is missing in Ahom people. Could you please insert it? Please ensure it is reliable source, according to Wikipedia policies. Chaipau (talk) 13:20, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Moving Pages to Ahom names

Please do not do this because of two reasons.

They make the pages less readable.
This goes against the Wikipedia policies since the other names are more commonly used.

Instead of changing these names, I urge you to focus on improving content. Many of us are trying to do this---but your efforts are distracting and taking our energies in correcting your edits to align more with Wikipedia policies.

Chaipau (talk) 11:27, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ahom king names

You have removed all the standard formatting that to the Ahom kings' individual pages. Please note the following.

You are using alternative spellings which are not standard. For example, -Hpa and -Pha are both used.
This is not common in English.
You are using all capitals, which is not standard in Wikipedia.

Could you please provide a reliable reference to which system you are following?

Chaipau (talk) 09:02, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Chaipau:Oh!! I will fix my Typographical errors i.e., capitals , common English spellings Sairg (talk) 08:17, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Chaipau (talk) 14:01, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Blanking

You are not permitted to blank declines for current blocks. Do not do so again. --Yamla (talk) 10:21, 18 March 2019 (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).

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

Request reason:

Hello, I was a contributor to Wikipedia related to Assam and Tai-Ahom pages, I have done 1.2K+ Reliable Contributions and started 3 Articles on Wikipedia. But unfortunately, I created multiple accounts and involved in Sockpuppetry as I was unaware that having multiple accounts is illegal in Wikipedia. I accept and understand that it was my Lack of Knowledge which made this mistake and I will not do such kind of mistakes from today. I want to contribute Wikipedia as I'd if you give me one chance as this is my first Mistake on Wikipedia. I was blocked due to abusively used multiple accounts. Can you please please give me a chance again Sairg (talk) 11:22, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This does not ring true. There were two separate rounds of sockpuppetry, and no chance you didn't understand after the first round. And the first round was problematic by itself, as you were using your other accounts to edit-war in favour of your preferred version of the page. This wasn't a case of simple lack of knowledge. This appears to be a case where you were deliberately acting in bad faith and not just once, either. Yamla (talk) 17:56, 17 March 2019 (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.

Blocked for sockpuppetry

This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing for sock puppetry per evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sairg. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. If you believe that this block was in error, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. Bbb23 (talk) 19:38, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Phuraloung concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Phuraloung, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 00:20, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Phuraloung

Hello, Sairg. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Phuraloung".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 21:50, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Phuraloung concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Phuraloung, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:21, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Phuraloung for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Phuraloung 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/Phuraloung 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. Paul_012 (talk) 19:03, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]