User talk:Dipupandey80

Welcome!

Hello, Dipupandey80, and welcome to Wikipedia!

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 New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, 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:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!--Biografer (talk) 06:13, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Sampat Saral

Hello Dipupandey80,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Sampat Saral for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

Kagundu Talk To Me 08:04, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

October 2017

Hello, I'm Sitush. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Kumar Vishwas seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Sitush (talk) 08:25, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright

Hi, we almost certainly can't use File:Dr Kumar Vishwas in Indore Lit Fest.jpg because you do not appear to have the copyright - you didn't take the photo and nor did Vishwas, although you say that it was sent to you by Vishwas and that potentially raises the issue of conflict of interest.

In the unlikely event that your OTRS ticket actually succeeds, we can revisit using the image. - Sitush (talk) 08:34, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

October 2017

Your recent editing history at Kumar Vishwas shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Sitush (talk) 08:35, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Dr Kumar Vishwas in Indore Lit Fest.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Dr Kumar Vishwas in Indore Lit Fest.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the file appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use it — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

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 removed 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. Sitush (talk) 08:53, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Discretionary sanctions regarding biographical articles

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions. Bishonen | talk 10:14, 21 October 2017 (UTC).[reply]

Discretionary sanctions regarding India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions. Bishonen | talk 10:14, 21 October 2017 (UTC).[reply]

October 2017

Hello, Dipupandey80. 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 COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:

avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the {{request edit}} template);
when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must 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 WP:PAID).

Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies.

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. —SpacemanSpiff 11:59, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It is also obvious that CreativeEdit is also your account. Please note that sockpuppetry isn't allowed except in limited circumstances. —SpacemanSpiff 12:00, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising and sockpuppetry.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. —SpacemanSpiff 12:13, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Dipupandey80 (talk) 12:18, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We can not help you. Bobherry Talk Edits 14:11, 21 October 2017 (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).

Dipupandey80 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

User Creativeedit does't belong to me. I was not aware about the 3 revert rule. Satush suggested me to edit the page and remove some contents I edited earlier. You can check his talk page. I was just convincing about the article. Hope you understand and unblock me. I will definetely keep in mind to use it under fair policy. Thanks. Dipupandey80 (talk) 12:25, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Clear violations of WP:MEAT, at the very least. And you haven't even attempted to address your inappropriate advertising. Yamla (talk) 13:17, 21 October 2017 (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.

Right, You asked here about a Facebook image and then the other account goes to Commons to upload it. Clearly there's some collusion between the two of you and both of you are here just to advertise certain bios. —SpacemanSpiff 12:30, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sir, for did of other users you are blocking me. Please consider this time. You can see my history and in future you can have watch on my activities. Thanks - Dipupandey80 (talk) 12:34, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You were both editing today and both editing on 5 October. There's very little activity in between, yet you both end up on my talk page within minutes of each other today. That stinks of something rotten. - Sitush (talk) 13:22, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. 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.

— Berean Hunter (talk) 13:25, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]