User talk:SagarPrimuson

August 2018

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising or promotion. From your contributions, this seems to be your only purpose.

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 ~~~~}}. MER-C 14:47, 6 August 2018 (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).

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

Request reason:

I didn't know I could be blocked. It is my first time using Wikipedia to publish a content or page. I was just making a page for my company at Wikipedia. But it turns out to be for advertising purposes only. I will look after it and create a page with more specific subjects line so that it could provide information to other viewers too. I will carefully look after "content creation policy" and will create new content by not disobeying the Wikipedia's policy. I am very sorry. Please unblock me. I will be more careful. SagarPrimuson (talk) 05:08, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You will not be unblocked until:

you agree to avoid creating or directly editing articles related to your organisation (requested edits will still be permitted)
you agree to abide by the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use and disclose your paid relationship in accordance with the paid contributor policy
you indicate what areas of Wikipedia you intend to edit in the future

If you have no interest in editing Wikipedia beyond writing about your organisation, then you will not be unblocked. If this is the case, I recommend you consider alternative outlets. Yunshui ^雲 _水 07:34, 7 August 2018 (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).

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

Request reason:

Thank you very much! I agree to the following things:

I agree to avoid creating or directly editing articles related to my organisation.
I agree to abide by the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use and disclose my paid relationship in accordance with the paid contributor policy.

In the coming days, I will edit on biased subjects and will write about the things that will benefits the end-user. I will not just look after myself but look after others too.

Yesterday was my first time publishing something on Wikipedia. I will never repeat the same mistakes again from me to get blocked again. Please unblock me! SagarPrimuson (talk) 09:56, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

No response to the comments below in 13 days. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:20, 21 August 2018 (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.

@MER-C:- do you object to an unblock? PhilKnight (talk) 22:31, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- The deleted content was pure, unmitigated spam about a topic highly prone to spam (online gambling). I am not seeing any understanding of the purpose of Wikipedia and I am very doubtful about the honesty of this request. MER-C 13:29, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- I have to agree with MER-C here, it was possibly the spammiest spam on which my spam-hardened eyes have ever set foot! (Goon homage^{[dead link]}.) I'd at least want no editing whatsoever on the same subject, disclosed or not, and not even via WP:AFC. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:45, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]