User talk:Lohithparthiban123

Misleading website?

What exactly is misleading about "FAFSA.gov?" ElKevbo (talk) 19:43, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

February 2019

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia, as you did at The College Monk, you may be blocked from editing. 2nd time the page is created. Daiyusha (talk) 11:02, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Hi. I noticed that you have removed warning messages from your Talk page. I hope that you understand that the warnings don't become invisible when you delete them - they are still there in your page history. In particular, please note the Wikipedia:Conflict of interest guidelines. Deb (talk) 12:15, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Deb (talk), since I was new to this, I thought this message was a spam, probably you are the only here who was kind of to notify and guide others rather than accusing them for false reasons. And then telling it was by mistake. We all do mistakes but these are done by some elite editors and this is why I think they say wikipedia is not reliable. Thanks, LohithLohithparthiban123 (talk) 15:23, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the warning

Hi, I warned you a second time by mistake, the mistake happening because your talk page was empty. And I then saw your history and undid my warning, and I did it almost immediately. It was you who undid my undo and are accusing me of warning you multiple times. Now you may want to contribute to wikipedia positively, but adding a non-notable page saying it will help others, no matter how benevolent it may be, is not exactly wikipedia's policy, see WP:GNG. Also I have just as many rights on wiki as you, I am no moderator. One doesn't need to be an admin to hand out warnings, but needs to be one to take any action, be it deleting, blocking etc.

I am not removing the 2nd warning that you undid because its not allowed as per wiki policy for someone to delete non-latest content from someone else's talk page. But you are allowed to, so feel free to remove it. Daiyusha (talk) 12:32, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

February 2019

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sock puppet, 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) 14:12, 8 February 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).

Lohithparthiban123 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Oh God. People now are accusing me now for things which have I have not done. Well Hello Bbb23 (talk), My name is Lohith Parthiban with a clear username unlike few people who are accusing me. I started using wikipedia a month ago contributing as much as I can. But since many users around the globe which you can clearly see from our sources asked us for creatING a wiki page where everyone can learn about the programs, we tried to create to help users to know what is the story behind our programs, and the article was same as many company articles in the Wikipedia Page and I did understand why It was deleted and I was okay with it since I was new to this. Now you are accusing me of creating multiple account? this is the treatment us the newbies get instead of guiding us to be better writers, they accuse us again and again. THANK YOU WIKIPEDIA FOR A GOOD WELCOME

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 00:19, 9 February 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.

Just so you know, they aren't just accusing you of sockpuppeting out of nothing, they have proof of several accounts using the same IP as you, you aren't exactly anonymous here , its either you yourself using these accounts, or your team using the same Internet connection. Daiyusha (talk) 17:16, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The unblock statement tells me you are collaborating and coordinating edits off-wiki (hence meat/sock puppetry) to promote a subject (spam). And you don't see what's wrong with that. Please read and heed WP:COI and WP:PAID. Please disclose the accounts of everyone you are coordinating with off-wiki. Dlohcierekim (talk) 17:28, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Hi. I'm not lifting the block until I know the facts, but it seems like a check has been done on you and, if you are not a sockpuppet, you are editing too closely with another user. You used the words "we" and "our". Can you tell us whether you are working with someone else and making Wikipedia edits at their suggestion? Deb (talk) 16:39, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]