User talk:SamridhTmrk

SamridhTmrk, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi SamridhTmrk! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like GoingBatty (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:01, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

December 2021

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Ram Charan, 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. Please do not add dubbed languages in notes column. Diff:[1] Ab207 (talk) 07:15, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Bhuvan Bam, 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. ManaliJain (talk) 15:15, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to List of most expensive Indian films. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 04:13, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Bhuvan Bam, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. ManaliJain (talk) 17:58, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please be careful with your edits as you are persistently making unconstructive edits despite getting reverted and being warned. If you need any help, check out Wikipedia:Questions or visit The Help desk for interactive assistance. ManaliJain (talk) 18:00, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Chhakka Panja 4 moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Chhakka Panja 4, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. BOVINEBOY2008 18:40, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of most expensive Indian films, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kabir Khan. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dhindora moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Dhindora, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 23:26, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cinema of Nepal

Hi SamridhTmrk, I have removed the section "Current Nepali Cinema", which you added to Cinema of Nepal. Articles about national film industries are supposed to tell the reader about the film production of that country, including its history, major milestones, important individual movies and film stars, etc. But tables with "current" / "now showing" movies are a kind of electronic programme guide, and that is not what Wikipedia is for. As for upcoming films, if such films are particularly notable (see this information about notability for films) they could be mentioned in the running text, with independent sources, but not with YouTube links.

I'm sorry your hard work on the article was removed, but your most recent version is still available in the page history and you can see it here. You could always copy that section into your sandbox, if you want to use the information. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 08:58, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

January 2022

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, 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, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Cinema of Nepal‎, you may be blocked from editing. The section above explains why the tables and sections you have added to the article are not appropriate. Restoring the sections again is disruptive, and you have already had multiple warnings about disruptive editing. bonadea contributions talk 08:01, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Cinema of Nepal. bonadea contributions talk 08:11, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is now a discussion thread at Talk:Cinema of Nepal, with a more detailed explanation of why the section with tables of "current" and "upcoming" films is inappropriate. Please remove the "Current Nepal's Cinema" section; as you can see, it is against several guidelines to have the section there. You are free to join the discussion on the talk page and explain why you think that it is relevant information, but note that the responsibility to convince other editors that the content belongs in the article is on you. --bonadea contributions talk 14:15, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

SamridhTmrk, please stop adding the inappropriate section to new articles. The section is not inappropriate only in Cinema of Nepal. The discussion I link above explains why it is inappropriate in all Wikipedia articles. Please take a minute to read it. I don't understand why you added it to List of highest-grossing Nepali films, since it has nothing to do with highest-grossing Nepali films. Continuing to add the section to Wikipedia articles is disruptive. --bonadea contributions talk 14:56, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And again, List of theatres in Nepal has nothing to do with movies, and you need to stop pasting those tables about movies showing in Nepal into other articles. --bonadea contributions talk 06:58, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove a speedy deletion notice from a page you have created yourself. SANTADICAE🎅 16:28, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SamridhTmrk! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of List of highest-grossing Nepali films several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:List of highest-grossing Nepali films, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. bonadea contributions talk 06:53, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your contributed article, Current Nepali Cinema

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, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Current Nepali Cinema. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – List of highest-grossing Nepali films. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at List of highest-grossing Nepali films. If you have new information to add, you might want to discuss it at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, 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. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Fram (talk) 16:23, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Need for a neutral point of view

Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. JBW (talk) 20:58, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Font colour

Don't add color: blue or similar formatting to words in Wikipedia articles. Links to Wikipedia articles are blue; text that isn't a link should not be blue. It has to be clear in the text what is and isn't a link. Thanks, --bonadea contributions talk 14:59, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How come you added even more text with a "color: blue" style? Please do not do that. It creates extra work for your fellow editors, who have to fix the inappropriate style. [2] --bonadea contributions talk 18:59, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Samridh Tamrakar

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 Samridh Tamrakar requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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. Fram (talk) 16:03, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please think carefully about how you are editing

You are clearly putting a lot of work into editing Wikipedia. However, a very large proportion of your work is actually achieving nothing, because edits are being reverted, and pages are being deleted. Add to that other problems, such as articles which have been moved to draft space, and which may or may not one day be restored as articles, and it is clear that there is a real danger that most of your work may be wasted. Worse still, if other editors keep having to put time and work into dealing with your editing, before long it is may start to seem that you are doing so little good, and causing so much damage, that on balance you are doing more harm than good. If that stage is reached, you will be blocked from editing. I hope that won't happen, and I am going to give you some advice on how to avoid it happening. Very, very simply, read what other editors have written to you about what they see as problems with your editing, think about what they have said, and try to make sure that you do what they suggest. You have been given a lot of warnings about particular problems, but you aren't going to go on getting more and more warnings at the same rate: either you stop doing things which are seen as disruptive because you choose to, or you stop doing them because you are not allowed to go on editing. Slow down: do less editing and more thinking about how to edit. Above all, please bear in mind that Wikipedia works by different people cooperating, and if an individual editor, instead of cooperating, ignores what everybody else says and just carries on doing what they want to, sooner or later they will not be allowed to continue. It is always a great pity when an editor who is keen and enthusiastic, and willing to put a lot of work into contributing to Wikipedia, is prevented from contributing because they won't or can't fit in to how Wikipedia works, and I hope you will avoid that happening to you, but you will avoid it only if you change your ways. JBW (talk) 22:34, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Final warning

SamridhTmrk, I and other experienced editors recognise the fact that you are not a vandal, and you are trying to improve Wikipedia. That is why I and other experienced editors have devoted quite a lot of time to explaining exactly why your edits are inappropriate. Unfortunately, when you keep doing the exact same thing without responding to any of the posts here on your user talk page, and you don't use the talk pages of the articles you edit, your edits are disruptive. Like several people have explained, that will eventually lead to your being blocked from editing.

In particular:

Do not paste the "Current shows" section, about current movies showing in Nepal, into another article. It does not belong anywhere on Wikipedia.
Do not edit war. Please read this information about what you should do if your edits are repeatedly reverted.
Do not add unsourced content, even if you know that it is true, and do not remove tags that say more sources are needed. This is one of the most important policies of Wikipedia. Please read it.

Please take the excellent advice from JBW in the post just above this one, and read all the informational messages on this page. If you don't understand something, please ask – the Tea house is a great place for doing that. You have had so many warnings and explanations that if you keep making the same edits, you will be reported to the administrators, who may block you from editing. --bonadea contributions talk 08:17, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Short-term block

I put quite a bit of thought and time into writing my message above. I could much more quickly and easily have just blocked you from editing, but I put in the extra effort because I wanted to help you to avoid getting blocked of possible. It is therefore very disappointing to me to find that my effort was completely wasted. Since you absolutely refuse to start editing in accordance with Wikipedia policies and guidelines, I have blocked you from editing, as I warned you would happen if you continued in the same way. For the present the block is for just 24 hours, as I hope that will be enough you persuade you to change your ways, but if you don't change then you will be blocked for much longer. (Just to avoid any doubt, my use of the word "refuse" above was quite deliberate. It is not just a matter of not understanding, as you have repeatedly openly stated your intention to continue to ignore the policy on unsourced editing, to mention just one example.) If you are willing to agree to abide by Wikipedia policies and guidelines from now on, and think that unblocking you would benefit the encyclopaedia, you may request an unblock. To do so, first read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} to the bottom of this page, replacing the words "Your reason here" with an explanation of the reasons why you should be unblocked. JBW (talk) 08:44, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Samridh Tamrakar (January 14)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by AssumeGoodWraith were:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

This submission provides insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject matter. Please see the guide to writing better articles for information on how to better format your submission.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Samridh Tamrakar and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Samridh Tamrakar, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

– AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 10:01, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

January 2022 (2)

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, 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, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at QFX Cinemas, you may be blocked from editing. You have just come off a short block for disruptive editing and refusing to respect Wikipedia policies and guidelines that have been repeatedly explained. It's disappointing to see that you haven't changed that editing behaviour. bonadea contributions talk 09:34, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at List of highest-grossing Nepali films. bonadea contributions talk 13:34, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at List of highest-grossing Telugu films. Don't fudge the figures without providing reliable sources. Diff: [3] Ab207 (talk) 16:06, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Namaste!

Hello Samridh ji. I appreciate your effort to add content to wikipedia. It's sad that you got blocked. To prevent such blocks in the future, please try to work together with other editors as well. It would be more helpful if you could also follow the suggestions from other users. Because no one owns the wikipedia content, whatever you have been adding here, may get removed in the future by other editors. It will be a total waste of your effort. Anyway, happy editing. Best regards!nirmal (talk) 13:02, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring at Pushpa

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Pushpa: The Rise. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. -- Ab207 (talk) 09:30, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Aama Saraswati Movies

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 Aama Saraswati Movies, 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. Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 19:02, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not unilaterally remove the speedy deletion tag from pages, especially if you have created those pages yourself. If you disagree by the tag, click "Contest this speedy deletion" on Aama Saraswati Movies. Thanks! – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 05:39, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Aama Saraswati Movies shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
The speedy deletion tag very clearly says in boldface "do not remove this notice from pages that you have created yourself". Let an administrator decide whether that tag is appropriate or not. You are still free to "Contest this speedy deletion" on Aama Saraswati Movies by clicking that blue button. Thanks for understanding! – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 06:44, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Aama Saraswati Movies. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.

You have received multiple warnings about removing speedy deletion tags and edit warring on different articles. You have already been blocked for disruptive editing once. You need to start respecting Wikipedia's policies, because otherwise you will be blocked again. bonadea contributions talk 07:54, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. I've moved your article to Draft:Aama Saraswati Movies. Do not move it out of draft until it passes review. Deb (talk) 08:37, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Aama Saraswati Movies (January 26)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by KylieTastic was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Aama Saraswati Movies and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Aama Saraswati Movies, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

KylieTastic (talk) 12:14, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 4

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Chhakka Panja 2, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nepali.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February 2022

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Chapali Height 2.

There's also this from yesterday: the figures are obviously incorrect, and the source you used as a reference doesn't mention Nepal.

This is another unsourced change, which contradicts the existing source: the source says "more than 200 million", it does not mention the figure "200,034,890" (much less 200,034,890 million, which means 200,034,890,000.) bonadea contributions talk 10:47, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make disruptive edits to Wikipedia contrary to the Manual of Style, as you did at Prabhas. Please don't add rowspans outside of the year column; see WP:FILMOGRAPHY and WP:ACCESS; and we don't sort notes and ref. Ab207 (talk) 15:09, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you use Wikipedia for promotion or advertising, as you did at QFX Cinemas. The "NOW SHOWING" stuff is pure advertising, and has no place in an encyclopedia. (Also, please read WP:MOS.) —Wasell^(T) 14:16, 7 February 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).

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

Request reason:

I really regret whatever misbehavior I did I am really sorry please give me a final chance to show something that I have. I am sorry for each and every user who faced problems because of me sorry Please give me a final chance I am very very sorry. SamridhTmrk

Decline reason:

"I really regret whatever misbehavior I did" is insufficient. You will need to tell us specifically what was wrong with your edits, how you will correct that in the future, and describe the productive contributions you intend to make. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 10:43, 16 February 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.

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).

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

Request reason:

I am here with my details I will do all sourced edits no unsourced or wrong edit will be made and I will always follow the guildlines of Wikipedia and try to make as good as possible. No advertisement will be shown no self promotion will be done. I will also help and try to create sourced and good Wikipedia. I am very sorry for whatever is done till now. Hope that i get a chance. THANK YOU

Decline reason:

This does not convince me. You don't address your conflict of interest and you don't tell me what subject areas you would write about instead. Yamla (talk) 14:21, 19 February 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.

March 2022

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).

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

Request reason:

Hello I am here to apologize for my worst behavior as I am new to editing Wikipedia its almost 6 months I guess and I had no idea about the User Talk page because I was never aware of it and I am not learning and doing edits whatever I did mess or good things are the things I learned by myself and had no idea what is good or bad. I never thought about communication about Wikipedia I thought it was an only page where we edit without anyone but I was wrong we need to work in a group and be good behaved because I have already been troubled and didn't follow Wikipedia guidelines and I am still learning about it so I never tried to destroy Wikipedia the only thing was I never had knowledge about it and I am trying my best to apologize and come back for editing with a good manner and editing coding is my hobby which I will never make it as the wrong path. I just read all warning messages and good messages on my talk page so I am now writing from that Point of View. As I am banned and feeling bad that I could do better but the worst I did which I was not aware of. So, to the Administrator, I request you to give me a final chance to contribute to Wikipedia no same mistakes will be made this is my promise to dear editors please Mr.admin. Thank You SamridhTmrk please review this please

Decline reason:

Please rewrite this so that it can be easily understood. The number of stream-of-conscioussness run-on sentences makes this almost incomprehensible. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 09:17, 7 March 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.

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).

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

Request reason:

Hello I am here to apologize for my worst behavior as I am new to editing Wikipedia its almost 6 months.

I guess and I had no idea about the User Talk page because I was never aware of it and I am not learning and doing edits whatever I did mess or good things are the things I learned by myself and had no idea what is good or bad.
I never thought about communication about Wikipedia I thought it was the only page where we edit without anyone but I was wrong we need to work in a group and be good behaved because I have already been troubled and didn't follow Wikipedia guidelines and I am still learning about it so I never tried to destroy Wikipedia the only thing was I never had knowledge about it.
I am trying my best to apologize and come back for editing in a good manner and editing coding is my hobby which I will never make it the wrong path.
I just read all warning messages and good messages on my talk page so I am now writing from that Point of View.
As I am banned and feeling bad that I could do better but the worst I did which I was not aware of.
I did poor and unsourced editing of List of highest-grossing films in Nepal and QFX Cinemas which i would like to improve or undo it

So, to the Administrator, I request you to give me a final chance to contribute to Wikipedia no same mistakes will be made this is my promise to dear editors please Mr.admin. Thank You SamridhTmrk please review this please

Decline reason:

You have been evading your block, which invalidates your assurances here. I am declining this request. --Blablubbs (talk) 14:05, 19 March 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.

Unblock discussion

That's good as far as it goes, but please address the conflict of interest, the unsourced editing, and please give a clearer picture of the constructive edits you would make. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 08:15, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

List of highest-grossing films in Nepal and QFX Cinemas are the main unsourced edits I made which I would like to re-build and for edits, I am not sure what to show you on.

Blocked for sockpuppetry

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SamridhTmrk. 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 read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Girth Summit _(blether) 11:24, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Chhakka Panja 4

Hello, SamridhTmrk. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Chhakka Panja 4, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 18:01, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Dhindora 2

Hello, SamridhTmrk. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Dhindora 2, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 00:01, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Chhakka Panja 4

Hello, SamridhTmrk. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Chhakka Panja 4".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:30, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Dhindora 2

Hello, SamridhTmrk. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Dhindora 2".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:55, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]