User talk:Naidu999

December 2021

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Naidu have been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Naidu was changed by Purus999 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.937072 on 2021-12-14T07:15:00+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 07:15, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Naidu. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. ਰਵੀ ਸਹਿਗਲ (talk) 07:18, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Purus999, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits to the page Gavara did not conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may have been removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations verified in reliable, reputable print or online sources or in other reliable media. Always provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to The Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Introduction tutorial
Contributing to Wikipedia
How to edit a page
Help pages
Simplified Manual of Style
Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

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 need personal help ask me on my talk page, or ask a question on your talk page. Again, welcome. Kautilya3 (talk) 18:03, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

January 2023

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Gavara, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Philipnelson99 (talk) 18:41, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Gavara naidu has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. Meszzy² (talk) 19:16, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, articles should not be moved without good reason. They should have a name that is both accurate and intuitive. Wikipedia has some guidelines in place to help with this. Generally, a page should only be moved to a new title if the current name doesn't follow these guidelines. Also, if a page move is being discussed, consensus needs to be reached before anybody moves the page. If you would like to experiment with page titles and moving, please use the test Wikipedia. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Meszzy² (talk) 19:21, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Gavara (caste)

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.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Gavara (caste) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Ppt91 (talk) 03:52, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

February 2023

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Gavara. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. —C.Fred (talk) 04:17, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Gavara, you may be blocked from editing. Julietacr (talk) 17:07, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Gavara. Dl2000 (talk) 01:02, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}. —C.Fred (talk) 23:00, 11 February 2023 (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).

Naidu999 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

i will add good content and sourced content from now onwards

Decline reason:

Procedural decline. You are not currently blocked. I also see you are not adding properly cited content. If you continue editing inappropriately, expect your next block to be longer. Yamla (talk) 20:47, 13 February 2023 (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.

Your edits to Gavara are doing far more harm than good. You have three options:

Ask for help, here or at Talk:Gavara, with the edits you are trying to make.
Stop editing the article entirely, and work somewhere else in the project.
Continue making disruptive edits and lose your privileges to edit the article.

Obviously, I hope you don't pick the last option. If you pick the first, I am willing to provide assistance. —C.Fred (talk) 21:23, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used mainly for trolling, disruption or harassment.

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 ~~~~}}.

UTRS appeal #72497

is closed. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:49, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS appeal #75335

is closed. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 02:37, 27 June 2023 (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).

Naidu999 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

i did sock puppetry of creating multiple accounts of user names 'naidu 123' and' naidu 999' which has been blocked bcz of sock puppetry and also i didnt adhere to wikipedia polices.now i got moy mistake what i did wqs wrong.i read all the policies of wikipedia from now onwards i would follow them.plz look into my block request it's been a long time that i was blocked, i was punished severily for my edits..i rectified my mistake plz unblock me. I would contribute my work this is last chance to me.my ip address is also blocked Naidu999 (talk) 22:03, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Blocks are not a punishment, but a means to end disruption to Wikipedia. The fact that you mention your IP address means that you are likely further attempting to evade this block. The only possible pathway forward is the standard offer. 331dot (talk) 08:35, 15 July 2023 (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).

Naidu999 (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 Naidu999 (talk) 11:23, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Confirmed to Vampirekin. Even despite your statements below, you didn't admit to this additional sockpuppet created only a few hours ago. This clearly shows you are operating in bad faith. You are now considered banned by the community under WP:3X and are no longer eligible for unblock consideration. Yamla (talk) 10:25, 21 July 2023 (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.

UTRS appeal #76239...

is declined. Note this appears to be an attempt to evade their block using one of their (admitted) sockpuppet accounts. --Yamla (talk) 16:15, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Iam admitting that all the three accounts belongs to me.i did a mistake of creating sock puppetry and doing disruptive edits belongs to one page,i understood my mistake and i adhere to wikipedia policies.i wont do such things in future.kindly unblock me.@Yamla Naidu999 (talk) 10:12, 21 July 2023 (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).

Naidu999 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Your reason here Naidu999 (talk) 07:37, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I do not see a good reason to unblock, particularly given the obvious WP:CIR issues. Drmies (talk) 18:53, 25 July 2023 (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.

iam admitting that vampirekin,apparao345 belongs to me.i didnt adhere to the wikipedia policy and i did unnecessary editing and added unsourceful content.plz give me a last chance.i understood all my mistakes and i adhere to wikipedia policies and avoid such editings.plz look into my request.i read all the wikipedia policies and wont do sockpuppetry again.plz unblock me and dont ban me.iam accepting my mistake.i wont do such things of vandalism or sock puppetry.kindly consider my request@Yamla Naidu999 (talk) 07:37, 23 July 2023 (UTC

Banned

This user is banned from editing the English Wikipedia. Administrators, please review the banning policy before unblocking.
(block log · contributions)

Yamla (talk) 12:46, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Yamla i admitted i forgot to raise a request earlier before that i got blocked Naidu999 (talk) 19:58, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Yamla plz look into my request i forgot to send the request.plz read it fully Naidu999 (talk) 18:51, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are a poor candidate for unblocking. Another admin will review your unblock request in time. --Yamla (talk) 23:30, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

BUT, i accepted my mistake and i wouldnt do such things.plz consider it a final request Naidu999 (talk) 07:42, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Blanking

You are not permitted to remove declined unblock requests for your currently active block. Do not do so again. --Yamla (talk) 11:53, 26 July 2023 (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).

Naidu999 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

your reason here Naidu999 (talk) 20:11, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Your best chance of an unblock is to take the standard offer and re-apply in 6 months time with no socking. PhilKnight (talk) 20:20, 26 July 2023 (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.

I never had an intention of doing vandalism to wikipedia.i only tried to add correct information.but i never cared about wiki reliable sources and did disruptive edits which got me blocked.later i realised my mistake and did my work in other language and created fee articles.but in english wikipedia,i did sock puppetry to evade block without knowing the consequences.now i got my mistake.i wont do such things again in future and i would follow wiki terms and conditions and follow those terms kindly reduce my block period and i got enough punishment.plz unblock me. @Drmies Naidu999 (talk) 20:11, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Dexterraj demonstrates pretty clearly that you aren't operating in good faith. Additionally, you are banned, not just blocked. No admin is permitted to unilaterally lift the block and you are clearly just trolling at this point. --Yamla (talk) 20:21, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.