User talk:MysteriousTE

Welcome!

Hello, MysteriousTE, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help. Need some ideas about what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 22:56, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Sayed Noorullah Jalili

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Draft:Sayed Noorullah Jalili, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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 deleted 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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. GPL93 (talk) 03:20, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

January 2022

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet 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 sockpuppet, 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. 331dot (talk) 08:49, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Draft:Sayed Noorullah Jalili

If this was the first article that you created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

The page Draft:Sayed Noorullah Jalili has been deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. As the page met any of these strictly-defined criteria, it was deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been deleted are:

It seemed to be unambiguous advertising which only promoted a company, product, group, service, person, or point of view and would need to have been fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, or you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. 331dot (talk) 08:50, 17 January 2022 (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).

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

Request reason:

I am not a sock puppet account. I have read the wikipedia guidelines and followed all the rules. One of the admins Liz removed the CSD tag and said that the article should be put for review. I don't understand why my account has been blocked as I have followed all the rules and done nothing wrong. I am not impersonating any other account. If an account has been made through my email I am not sure but I haven't so please unblock me. MysteriousTE (talk) 09:15, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

My use of the checkuser tool indicates that you have abused multiple accounts. PhilKnight (talk) 09:49, 17 January 2022 (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.

How did you come to edit about this person? It wasn't by chance. 331dot (talk) 09:23, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As you can see in my edits, I have edited pages for underground politicians in UK, India, Pakistan and other. I also did the same on everyone wiki and gyanepedia. This article showed up on gyaanepedia and it has cited sources so I copied to here. You can check my edit history, I have written everything about how I found the article. I just fixed the grammar errors and label it as advertising because it need some changes.

I did check your edit history, and that's not what you said in edit summaries. I furthermore don't think that you were just the unluckiest person on Earth to choose a subject for which a blocked user has repeatedly attempted to create an article for. However, you don't need to convince me, but whomever reviews this. 331dot (talk) 09:37, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You are entitled to your opinion and I respect your opinion. In the edit summaries, I wrote the same thing I just told you, I found the article on everyonewiki and you can do so yourself. It is both on gyanepedia and everyonewiki. I did more research and the subject has articles on Bloomberg, CBSnews, lots of Afghani networks and even BBC. I don't know about the blocked account but I don't see why the subject is bad to write about. Please let me know.

As I said, I don't believe you picked this person at random to edit about, be it in general or among undergroud politicians. Even if you aren't a sock puppet, this would be meat puppetry. If whomever reviews this believes you, they will unblock you and may do so without consulting me further. 331dot (talk) 09:45, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Everyonewiki is literally a mirror site of wikipedia. Any content I copy from there was already on wikipedia int he first place. Gyanepedia is literally a hub of one published wikipedia articles. My job for myself was to fix them and publish them here. Your right, I no longer need to consult with you.

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).

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

Request reason:

In response to the unblock request, I can hereby state that the reason for the IP checker was because I am in the same location as the other blocked user but I had no clue of their blocking or even that they made an account. In response to 331dot, I do have a conflict of interest. I am not paid by the subject to do anything. However, I am writing the article of free-will. You are right in that I did not write about him by chance but the rest of my story is true. I did not sock puppet, I did not know that the other person also made the account or made any effort to create this article so I tried it myself. Although I have a somewhat conflict of interest as I had some relation to the subject in the past. That does not make the basis of the article invalid. I know the subject and did not create this article out of praise but rather because I believe this subject deserves a wikipedia article. The 2019 elections were historic in Afghanistan and were the penultimate elections of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. Every candidate has a wikipedia page even some who were never shown in the media and are not notable at all. I did find this article on gyaanepedia and was astounded that it was not on wikipedia. In all honesty, it does sound a bit like a promotional advert but I changed it up and posted it here again. As honesty should be a priority in this situation, I will come clean and say that I copied the article from that site without knowledge that the other person had already attempted to post it. Neither me nor the other person are paid by the individual. We have some familial relation which creates a conflict of interest but that is irrelevant if the content itself is free of any unambiguous promotion. I would like to apologize for this misunderstanding and for wasting the time of wikipedia admins who clearly have more important things to attend to. Before this subject gets protected and blocked from writing, I would like to request that wikipedia admins give me one chance to redeem myself and establish this account as my forever account so I can write about other topics as well. I have come clean about the entire scenario and withhold my innocence in this scenario. I am simply trying to write an article and many more to come. Please assist me in this regard. MysteriousTE (talk) 10:08, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Your defense is nonsense. Your IP(s) are not the only thing evaluated by a checkuser. Bbb23 (talk) 19:41, 17 January 2022 (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.

331dot, you talked about writing by chance. I apologize for trying to mislead you. I know now that being honest in this scenario is the best instance. This was all by chance. I did not know the other user was going to write about the subject so I went ahead. My skills on wikipedia are pretty average to good and I believe I can be a good contribution to the community if my page lives and I am able to make edits and corrections to other pages as well. I would just like this whole mind-boggling block to be removed so I can go forth with a clean reputation on wikipedia and ensure that at least this one article is published correctly. Once again, I apologize for misleading and giving you false info. The whole story is true except that I do have a conflict of interest which I said I didn't.

(edit conflict) I will only say, please read other stuff exists. Other inappropriate articles existing does not mean that more inappropriate articles can be added. Otherwise, nothing could ever be removed from Wikipedia. As this is (largely) a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible for inappropriate articles to go undetected, even for years. We can only address what we know about. If, once unblocked, you would like to help us detect and address articles about non-notable candidates for public office, we could use the help. The rest of this will be dealt with by someone else, should you make another request. 331dot (talk) 10:18, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Great, I completely understand. In the case that my unblock request is approved by the other admin then I will definitely assist the community by reporting those pages. Even in this new account, I went to my profile and was recommended articles to fix up. I saw at least 20 different ones with unambiguous advertising and clear promotion but they were unblocked and not deleted. The article I am trying to publish is not innaprorpiate nor does it have excessive advertising. Small hints of bias should be dealt with through improvements and suggestions by wikipedia admins. Without a warning or hint, how would the person know what's wrong. Overall, I understand the matter and will follow up with due diligence.