User talk:Rajeshfadnavis

Welcome!

Hello, Rajeshfadnavis!

Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Getting Started

Tutorial
Learn everything you need to know to get started.

Introduction to contributing

The Teahouse
Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.

The Task Center
Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help.

Tips

Don't be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
It's normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don't worry if you don't understand everything at first—it's fine to edit using common sense.
If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue at the article's talk page. Be civil, and don't restore the edit unless there is consensus.
Always use edit summaries to explain your changes.
When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.

Happy editing! Cheers, Doug Weller talk 16:04, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in South Asian social groups. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has authorised uninvolved administrators to impose contentious topics restrictions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, expected standards of behaviour, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on these sanctions. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Doug Weller talk 07:06, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug WellerThank you I'll try to improve the articles in the boundary of my specialisations. Rajeshfadnavis (talk) 18:52, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

iUniverse is a selfpublisher

And we can't use it. Doug Weller talk 14:55, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug WellerMy bad I didn't saw the publisher,I'll replace it with peer to peer journal/trustable book.Thanks. Rajeshfadnavis (talk) 15:08, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April 2024

Hello, I'm Doug Weller. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Joshi punekar that didn't seem very civil, so it may have been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. And lack of good faith Doug Weller talk 08:38, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug WellerIs this the price of good faith?Even without cu I got blocked. Rajeshfadnavis (talk) 14:39, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi@Doug Weller,

Did you saw Doug I told repeatedly that I am not sock now you can see the result of check user "Rajeshfadnavis appears Possible based on geolocation but Unlikely from a technical standpoint.-- Ponyobons mots 22:20, 18 April 2024 (UTC)"

Will I be unblocked or not that is not important but no one can hide truth that's what I know. Rajeshfadnavis (talk) 15:46, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Joshi punekar per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Joshi punekar. 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 review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 13:29, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting unblock

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).

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

Request reason:

Dear admins, I don't have any account and no way related to any alternative accounts till now .This is my solo account, wikipedia have a very good checkuser tool just use that once. 1.All the ip involved in the sock puppetry has been disabled by the admin long back.Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Joshi punekar/Archive 2.See the presented evidence which is highly irrelevant and meaningless.[[1]] 3.I had opposed the consensus by the user who lodged the complaint Talk:daivadnya,so personal grudge should not work in wiki. 4.Multiple attempts were made to block me including unethical means like personal message and forcing the admin User talk:RegentsPark:Obvious block section. I am requesting the visiting admins to investigate this case properly and unblock me. Rajeshfadnavis (talk) 14:36, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Per WP:CHECKME checkusers do not use their tools on a user at the request of the user. The discussion that you dismiss as "irrelevant and meaningless" is not so. 331dot (talk) 08:25, 13 April 2024 (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 request with check user result

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).

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

Request reason:

Hi admins, I am pasting Check user report here

"Rajeshfadnavis appears Possible based on geolocation but Unlikely from a technical standpoint.-- Ponyobons mots 22:20, 18 April 2024 (UTC)"

Rajeshfadnavis appears Possible based on geolocation but Unlikely from a technical standpoint.-- Ponyobons mots 22:20, 18 April 2024 (UTC)"

So let me reiterate - I don't have any account and no way related to any alternative accounts till now .This is my solo account, 1.All the ip involved in the sock puppetry has been disabled by the admin long back.Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Joshi punekar/Archive 2.See the presented evidence which is highly irrelevant. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Joshi_punekar 3.I had opposed the consensus by the user who lodged the complaint Talk:daivadnya,so personal grudge should not work in wiki. 4.Multiple attempts were made to block me including unethical means like personal message and forcing the admin https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:RegentsPark:Obvious block section. I am requesting the visiting admins to investigate this case properly and unblock me.

In this case neither allegations are based on vandalism nor Abuse nor multiple accounts (Check user report is mentioned above ).So a random case has blocked the genuine user.Requesting the admin to revisit this. Rajeshfadnavis (talk) 15:39, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

The behavioral evidence presented in Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Joshi punekar § 02 April 2024 (permalink) establishes beyond a reasonable doubt that the same person who operated the Joshi punekar (talk · contribs) account is the operator of this account. — Newslinger talk 06:48, 26 April 2024 (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.