User talk:Deprtcsa

{{db-user}} User talk pages are not deleted. If you wish to disappear, you are welcome to just stop using this account. Note that you are not permitted to edit Wikipedia or set up any other account, while this one is blocked. --Yamla (talk) 15:07, 26 July 2019 (UTC) {{db-user}} how will you stop me or anyone you have no jurisdiction in my country i wilk do by hook or by crook. Do whatever you can. Block the ip proxies wilk do the work. Do anything i will do definite disruptive editing if this type of abuse of me is there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deprtcsa (talk • contribs) [reply]

db-user is not available to you here. Stop trying to use it. You are welcome to remove everything from this page other than your declined unblock requests. If you wish, I can do that for you. But stop abusing db-user. --Yamla (talk) 15:14, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Draft:Pushpendra Kulshrestha a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Pushpendra Kulshrestha. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. Deprtcsa (talk) 07:44, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Deprtcsa, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Bulletin Today, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. 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 have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Rhadow (talk) 11:53, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing for sock puppetry. 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. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 10:43, 26 July 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).

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

Request reason:

I claim full responsibility for my another account Cmschat and this type of work will not happen next time Deprtcsa (talk) 12:10, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Great, but this doesn't address your spamming at all. Given that's what your sockpuppetry appeared to involve, setting up an account to evade scrutiny and continue spamming, you will need to address this in your unblock request. What policies apply? How specifically will your future edits be significantly different from your previous edits? Why should we trust you, given you set up an account to continue your bad behaviour? Yamla (talk) 12:58, 26 July 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.

Unblock

{unblock|All edits only done in this account are by me. There is no relation of me wih another account. And clearly I have no personal or close connection with the edits I have made. The articles created by me are in full public view and I see the articles to be at large public importance so I created them. Deprtcsa (talk) 14:28, 26 July 2019 (UTC)}}[reply]

You are not permitted to modify or remove declined unblock requests for currently active blocks. Do not do so again. You may also wish to edit your unblock request, as you are either lying now "no relation" or lying before "full responsibility". Note that we have established sockpuppetry, so we know for a fact these other accounts are sockpuppets. --Yamla (talk) 14:31, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No unblock needed

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).

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

Request reason:

Need not be unblocked as this is massive hitting back on sources and other differences between western culture and ancient bharatiya culture. These type of platforms like Wikipedia 95% times consider sources only from renowned portals and websites and journals that are hugely influenced by communism, marxism, leninism from russian and chinese culture and some other influential back channel organization like KGB of russia, CIA fro United States, MI 5 especially from The so called Great but Ordinary Britain. Most importantly no one needs discussion on Islamic terrorism and islam is the only and only religion which originates terrorism and almost 75 % webs are effected from that. No ine wants any discussions on any of these matters and of course Wikipedia will always keep itself superior fron facts. And as this is huge setback for whole Bharatiya culture, I sought a very massive outbreak of my editing when I edited the name to change of Allahabad to Prayagraj. It is pitt that so many people visit Wikipedia. They will understand in due course of time in next coming years. And i dont need to be on this kind of non independent platform. I warn you there will be many consequences not by me or us (Bharatiya people) as we are the world's most tolerant people on land. I can't tolerate this kind of abuse of me or Bharatiya culture as I didn't came on this platform for moneyas almost 80 percent of Wikipedia contributors work for money. So conclusively the whole community can take any action on me. I don't need these kind of platforms until these are reformed. Wikipedia administrators, editors and whole community can take any action against me even deletion of account. Deprtcsa (talk) 14:50, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Per request. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇} 15:00, 26 July 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.

Deletion

Need not be unblocked as this is massive hitting back on sources and other differences between western culture and ancient bharatiya culture. These type of platforms like Wikipedia 95% times consider sources only from renowned portals and websites and journals that are hugely influenced by communism, marxism, leninism from russian and chinese culture and some other influential back channel organization like KGB of russia, CIA fro United States, MI 5 especially from The so called Great but Ordinary Britain. Most importantly no one needs discussion on Islamic terrorism and islam is the only and only religion which originates terrorism and almost 75 % webs are effected from that. No ine wants any discussions on any of these matters and of course Wikipedia will always keep itself superior fron facts. And as this is huge setback for whole Bharatiya culture, I sought a very massive outbreak of my editing when I edited the name to change of Allahabad to Prayagraj. It is pitt that so many people visit Wikipedia. They will understand in due course of time in next coming years. And i dont need to be on this kind of non independent platform. I warn you there will be many consequences not by me or us (Bharatiya people) as we are the world's most tolerant people on land. I can't tolerate this kind of abuse of me or Bharatiya culture as I didn't came on this platform for moneyas almost 80 percent of Wikipedia contributors work for money. So conclusively the whole community can take any action on me. I don't need these kind of platforms until these are reformed. Wikipedia administrators, editors and whole community can take any action against me even deletion of account.Deprtcsa (talk) 15:03, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock

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).

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

Request reason:

Insert your reason to be unblocked here

Decline reason:

duplicate request see below -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 04:48, 5 August 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.

Unblock

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).

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

Request reason:

Unblock requested. Kindly unblock

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 04:50, 5 August 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.

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).

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

Request reason:

kindly unblock as due to some problems i had been blocked.

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yunshui ^雲 _水 14:13, 8 August 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.

Deprtcsa (talk) 12:50, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have revoked talk page access, as you are clearly just trolling at this point. Another admin will be along shortly to review your unblock request. --Yamla (talk) 12:51, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Block evasion

This user has engaged in block evasion as 2409:4043:408:6741:0:0:21D2:58AC in August, 2019. --Yamla (talk) 13:34, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Rachana Govil

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

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! Lapablo (talk) 10:40, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]