User talk:GurSikh123

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not make changes to existing sourced content. If you want to add any additional content, please cite a source: see Wikipedia:How to cite your sources. Merely claiming that what you're adding is supported by sources is not enough. If you haven't gone through WP:TUTORIAL already, please do. utcursch | talk 14:37, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove the sourced content of Ahluwalia (caste). If you want to add/remove some details then discuss at Talk:Ahluwalia (caste). Also, do not forget to provide the relevant quotations from the sources. - NitinMlk (talk) 17:16, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, please stop removing sourced content. If you want to add sourced content, see Wikipedia:How to cite your sources. You have to cite the sources in actual article body, not in the edit summary. Moreover, you should not remove existing sourced content: if your source disagrees with the sources currently cited in the article, both sources can be retained in the article with attribution (e.g. "According to X, ..., but according to Y, ..."). You have made unsourced edits more than 10 times (including from IP addresses such as 42.109.206.14). The next time you do this, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. utcursch | talk 14:39, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

For the last time, please do not remove existing sourced content from the articles. utcursch | talk 22:15, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

December 2020

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nikhil448. 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 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 ~~~~}}.

GirthSummit _(blether) 20:05, 24 December 2020 (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).

GurSikh123 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

My edits were not wrong as I had everytime informed my reasons for making changes on the Wikipedia page, especially to Mr. Utcursch on the talk page with all due respect, but somehow I have finally been blocked. It should not have been done, as we should act with more maturity, rather than always blocking people, as always done by Mr. Utcursch. I believe there can't be 50 odd people claiming the same thing that I was doing or writing. It is on understanding the reality & facts of the place, rather than only going through sources. Even many sources were informed to Mr. Utcursch on talk page, which had claimed the same thing that I was writing. I still believe that Nikhil448 account also belongs to Mr. Utcursch & even if I'm blocked, I still request that there has to be some prior reason for blocking so many people/users on writing/mentioning the same thing that I had written/mentioned.

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. SQL ^{Query me!} 04:09, 25 December 2020 (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.

GurSikh123 (talk) 02:54, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Further to this I am ready to provide, resourceful content(sources/books) & attaching the same with the changed words in the Wikipedia article.

But I believe that Wikipedia doesn't go ahead the Arbitrary activities/feelings of one person(Mr. Utcursch) & allows others also to edit wikipedia page with proof written via the help sources/books. GurSikh123 (talk) 08:29, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Read the block notice - you have not been blocked for the content you were adding, you have been blocked for abusively using multiple accounts. Any unblock request needs to address that. GirthSummit _(blether) 08:34, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I had created another account only because I was informed by Mr. Utcursch that he will block my this account on talk page, for which only I created my second account, so that I can continue to add sourced information on the Wikipedia page. Other to this I had no other reason to create another account.

I am not against anybody & I respect everyone, including Mr. Utcursch & I have never even told him that I will block him. It's just the difference of our thinking for which we continue to edit as per our added sources/information.

If it's only about the other account, I will request Wikipedia to unblock my one of the accounts, so that I can continue to add sourced information. GurSikh123 (talk) 12:58, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request you to kindly review my case of unblocking my one of the accounts, since I had created the second id only because Mr. Utcursch had informed that he will block my this Wikipedia id(clearly mentioned on the talk page) & he has already blocked many people from editing the Wikipedia page. So to continue to edit on Wikipedia, I had created the second id. I respect everyone & mention everyone with respect & would sincerely request Wikipedia to unblock one of my accounts. GurSikh123 (talk) 06:09, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kindly update me on my above👆 request for activation of my one of my own accounts, since the second account was created only because Utcursch had informed me that he will block my this account which is clearly mentioned on the talk page of "Ahluwalia caste". My request to Wikipedia is that please allow activation of my one account.🙏 GurSikh123 (talk) 13:22, 28 December 2020 (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).

GurSikh123 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I had created another account only because I was informed by Mr. Utcursch that he will block my this account on the talk page of Ahluwalia caste. This was the only reason I had created my second account, so that I can continue to add sourced information on the mentioned Wikipedia page. Other to this I had no other reason to create another account. I am not against anybody & I respect everyone, including Mr. Utcursch & I have never even told him that I will block him. It's just the difference of our thinking & views for which we continue to edit as per our added sources/information.

If it's only about the other account, I will request Wikipedia to unblock my one of the accounts, so that I can continue to add sourced information.

Decline reason:

That's not a valid reason as per WP:SOCK. Your best bet is to wait six months with zero edits, then apply under WP:SO on your original account. At that point, you will have to convince us you understand why your actions were inappropriate and convince us you'll not act inappropriately in the future. Yamla (talk) 18:55, 1 January 2021 (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).

GurSikh123 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I had written the truth & Wikipedia allows you to create a second account if one of your accounts are blocked.

Now I had created another account only because I was informed by Mr. Utcursch that he will block my this account clearly mentioned on talk page of Ahluwalia caste, for which only I created my second account, so that I can continue to add sourced information on the Wikipedia page & my point is valid, since reason on https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Nikhil448 clearly says that I mentioned Mr.Utcursch with the use of both accounts i.e. with complete respect & added information with complete addition from sources/books.

Understanding of this valid point requires maturity & I hope & pray that Wikipedia will unblock one of my accounts, after which I promise to continue to add resourceful information from various sources/books. GurSikh123 (talk) 02:57, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You will not be unblocked until you can explain our policy on sock puppetry, which says the opposite of what you're claiming. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 10:44, 2 January 2021 (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|reason= I have gone through the reason mentioned on https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Nikhil448 and I want to assure every admin that Nikhil448 account does not belong to me.

Secondly the other IP address also mentioned on https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Nikhil448 don't belong to me. It is only that somehow Nikhil448 & my some of my views on Ahluwalia surname, Ahluwalia caste & Ahluwalia misl are similar. Other to this there is no relation to the account named Nikhil448. I had always added my sources to my edits & clearly mentioned the same on talk pages also of the above mentioned Wikipedia pages.

Thirdly I currently have only 2 accounts i.e. GurSikh123 & TruthfulTalk9 and kindly be assured that creation of TruthfulTalk9 was only done because one of the Wikipedia members named Utcursch had informed me that he will block my GurSikh123 Wikipedia id( clearly mentioned on the talk page).

My appeal to every Wikipedia admin is that I swear that Nikhil448 account doesn't belong to me & my sincere request to the Wikipedia administrator is that to unblock my 1 account out of 2(i.e. either GurSikh123 or TruthfulTalk9), so that I can continue to add sourced information again from relevant sources/books.🙏

Further to this I also promise that I shall use only single account on Wikipedia in future.} GurSikh123 (talk) 19:01, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

{unblock|reason= I have gone through the reason mentioned on https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Nikhil448 and I want to assure every admin that Nikhil448 account does not belong to me.

Secondly the other IP address also mentioned on https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Nikhil448 don't belong to me. It is only that somehow Nikhil448 & some of my views on Ahluwalia surname, Ahluwalia caste & Ahluwalia misl are similar. Other to this there is no relation to the account named Nikhil448. I had always added my sources to my edits & clearly mentioned the same on talk pages also of the above mentioned Wikipedia pages.

Thirdly I currently have only 2 accounts i.e. GurSikh123 & TruthfulTalk9 and kindly be assured that creation of TruthfulTalk9 was only done because one of the Wikipedia members named Utcursch had informed me that he will block my GurSikh123 Wikipedia id( clearly mentioned on the talk page).

My appeal to every Wikipedia admin is that I swear that Nikhil448 account doesn't belong to me & my sincere request to the Wikipedia administrator is that to unblock my 1 account out of 2(i.e. either GurSikh123 or TruthfulTalk9), so that I can continue to add sourced information again from relevant sources/books.🙏

Further to this I also promise that I shall use only single account on Wikipedia in future. GurSikh123 (talk) 09:53, 6 January 2021 (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).

GurSikh123 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have gone through the reason mentioned on https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Nikhil448 and I want to assure every admin that Nikhil448 account does not belong to me. Secondly the other IP address also mentioned on https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Nikhil448 don't belong to me. It is only that somehow Nikhil448 & some of my views on Ahluwalia surname, Ahluwalia caste & Ahluwalia misl are similar. Other to this there is no relation to the account named Nikhil448. I had always added my sources to my edits & clearly mentioned the same on talk pages also of the above mentioned Wikipedia pages.

Thirdly I currently have only 2 accounts i.e. GurSikh123 & TruthfulTalk9 and kindly be assured that creation of TruthfulTalk9 was only done because one of the Wikipedia members named Utcursch had informed me that he will block my GurSikh123 Wikipedia id( clearly mentioned on the talk page).

My appeal to every Wikipedia admin is that I swear that Nikhil448 account doesn't belong to me & my sincere request to the Wikipedia administrator is that to unblock my 1 account out of 2(i.e. either GurSikh123 or TruthfulTalk9), so that I can continue to add sourced information again from relevant sources/books.🙏

Further to this I also promise that I shall use only single account on Wikipedia in future.

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only. This unblock request has been open for more than two weeks but has not proven sufficient for any reviewing administrator to take action. You are welcome to request a new block review if you substantially reword your request. 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. Yamla (talk) 14:52, 31 January 2021 (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.