User talk:Sanju the king

Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, Sanju the king! Thank you for your contributions. I am Beeblebrox and I have been editing Wikipedia for some time, so if you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{help me}} at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Beeblebrox (talk) 06:36, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect audio label for Asuran and 96

Hello there. I noticed that you put Lahari Music and T-Series for Asuran's audio label, which is incorrect and no sources to support the fact. The film's audio label is actually released under the producer's Kalaippuli Audio label with Divo as it's digital partner, which is clearly evident on the poster's release and I have included the jukebox reference to support the fact. Also, you did the same for 96, where the actual audio label for that film is under Think Music. Please do not edit it again without checking proper sources. Thanks. MaxillanPaladiusG (talk) 09:58, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Continued issues

Aside from the repeated lies and deception from your continued socking (see that note I left on your last sock), there are still issues with your editing that is contrary to Wikipedia policies and editing norms. You've been left messages, notices and advice across your many accounts and just don't seem to listen that well to others. That's not very helpful. Please think about the time you're wasting - both yours and other editors. Ravensfire (talk) 15:39, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock Request

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).

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

Request reason:

I consider myself as an asset for creating good contribution to Wikipedia. I have been noticed that this user has been misused, everytime and I understand the fact, about sock-puppetting, which had been foolish in my part. I would now like to request an unblock waiting the appropriate time(In my opinion.)of six months without editing. I want to prove my professionalism and general enjoyment of being part of Wiki in making productive contributions. That is, I still wish to be a part of Wikipedia through my current account and that it will not happen again. Sanju the king (talk) 01:53, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

It may be appropriate to unblock you after six months if you can properly address your rampant abuse. But it hasn't been six months yet. So you are not eligible for unblock consideration under WP:SO. Yamla (talk) 11:42, 26 November 2019 (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).

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

Request reason:

I understand the reason, why I have been blocked. I know that my account has been obviously socked by some user. But, I have no connection with Sanuj Satish 2006 or any other accounts. The block is aimed at resolving a separate situation and I have been blocked unintentionally as a result because I use the same IP range. I still wish I want to be a part of Wikipedia through my current account, and that it will never happen again.

Decline reason:

You clearly said in your first unblock request "I have been noticed that this user has been misused, everytime and I understand the fact, about sock-puppetting, which had been foolish in my part." Now you say you never did any sock puppetry. This is either showing you don't have the competence to edit here, or you're just flat out lying. As was suggested in your previous unblock, you really should wait the six months before considering to request an unblock again. RickinBaltimore (talk) 13:58, 27 November 2019 (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.

In your first unblock request, you admit to violating WP:SOCK and say this was foolish of you to do so. In your second unblock, you claim you have no connection with any other account. One of these is obviously a lie. Which one is true and why did you lie? --Yamla (talk) 12:41, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It is the truth, I need to accept that, I don't have any connection with other Wikipedia accounts. -- Sanju the king (talk) 13:07, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

So why did you lie and say you had been violating WP:SOCK? And why on earth should we believe you now? --Yamla (talk) 13:13, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I feel guilty about myself that, I have been misused by a third person. It is the fact, I had to accept that I socked obviously. Sanju the king (talk) 13:16, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"I had to accept that I socked obviously". Yet earlier today, you said, "I don't have any connection with other Wikipedia accounts." STOP IT. Either you violated WP:SOCK (and lied about it) or you did not violate WP:SOCK (and lied about it). Which is it? Pick one position. ONE CHOICE. And then explain why you lied. If your next edit does not pick one single position and does not explain why you lied, you will lose access to this talk page. --Yamla (talk) 13:22, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't violate WP:SOCK. This is my final decision. I had lied because, I'm naive enough to choose what is right or wrong. -- Sanju the king (talk) 13:26, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]