User talk:Shreeshampandey

Welcome!

Hello, Shreeshampandey, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as User:Shreeshampandey/sandbox/Shreesham Pandey, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

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 have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Legacypac (talk) 11:50, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Shreeshampandey/sandbox/Shreesham Pandey

A tag has been placed on your user page, User:Shreeshampandey/sandbox/Shreesham Pandey, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be advertising which only promotes or publicises someone or something. Promotional editing of any kind is not permitted, whether it be promotion of a person, company, product, group, service, belief, or anything else. This is a violation of our policies regarding acceptable use of user pages — user pages are intended for active editors of Wikipedia to communicate with one another as part of the process of creating encyclopedic content, and should not be mistaken for free webhosting resources or advertising space. Please read the guidelines on spam, the guidelines on user pages, and, especially, our FAQ for Organizations.

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. Legacypac (talk) 11:50, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Shreesham Pandey (February 26)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Legacypac was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia.

Legacypac (talk) 11:50, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Shreeshampandey! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Legacypac (talk) 11:50, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest

Hello, Shreeshampandey. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. – Athaenara ✉ 14:17, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

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 ~~~~}}.

– Athaenara ✉ 14:17, 26 February 2019 (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).

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

Request reason:

I am really sorry for my content seemed promoting and advertising but in fact it is really an encyclopedic content. The name of the page that is mentioned is a topic of a recently known figure and is a well established persona. The information are fully correct and do not include any illegal or inappropriate contents.. But if this page does't suit well according to the rules and regulations then you can and must delete it. I request you to make me eligible to edit again and I'll keep my endeavors well justified. Thanks Shreeshampandey (talk) 04:03, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

No response to the question below in just about a month. MER-C 18:01, 22 April 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.

Are you Shreesham Pandey? 331dot (talk) 09:41, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am.Shreeshampandey (talk) 14:11, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you speak about yourself as if you were someone else above? What do you want to edit about instead of yourself? 331dot (talk) 14:23, 24 March 2019 (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).

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

Request reason:

I just want to say Sorry....I think I should be really sorry for posting a article that seemed Advertising...sorry.....you can delete the page the talk page if you want.....I promise i will just be responsible for minor edits in articles and will follow each guideline well and carefully Shreeshampandey (talk) 07:44, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

As per below. Yamla (talk) 11:58, 23 February 2020 (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 doesn't answer my questions above. 331dot (talk) 08:11, 23 February 2020 (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).

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

Request reason:

It's been more than 3 years and my account has not been restored or unblocked. There were problems then and there definitely had been some mistakes and misunderstandings from this side as to what should have been up there. As for that part, I have already been given a punishment as to have been blocked from further editing for more than 3 years. I assure you that I've grown since then as a better reader and writer of entries on wiki and have been an ardent follower of wiki'a terms, guidelines and conditions. I assure you that no further violations will be done after the ban is revoked. Kindly do the needful in this regard do that I can contribute my part and be included in this org once again. Shreeshampandey (talk) 05:34, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You have been evading your block through the account Aletarga. As such, I am not prepared to unblock this account. Girth Summit _(blether) 08:56, 10 October 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.

Regarding unblock-ing of account

Hello, It's been more than 3 years and my account has not been restored or unblocked. There were problems then and there definitely had been some mistakes and misunderstandings from this side as to what should have been up there. As for that part, I have already been given a punishment as to have been blocked from further editing for more than 3 years. I assure you that I've grown since then as a better reader and writer of entries on wiki and have been an ardent follower of wiki'a terms, guidelines and conditions. I assure you that no further violations will be done after the ban is revoked. Kindly do the needful in this regard do that I can contribute my part and be included in this org once again. Shreeshampandey (talk) 05:30, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]