User talk:Sukanta Das

License tagging for Image:Page1 copy.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Page1 copy.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 18:10, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism Warning

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. . Please refer to Wikipedia no personal attacks, no profanity policy--Pinaki ghosh 02:58, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is for constructive editing

Sukanta, or whoever you are; Wikipedia is for constructive editing; it is not a battle ground. If that is your purpose, choose some other platform. You seem to fail to understand the purpose of Wikipedia, since you are new to it. Look at your history; you have NO positive work in your credit; whereas I have written/edited over 70 constructive articles on a wide range of subjects; and that is what Wikipedia is. You are welcome to create constructive articles for Wikipedia; for other purposes, please choose another suitable platform.--Pinaki ghosh 08:48, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By the way; I can do anything with my talk page, add content, remove content; whoever gave you the idea that I cannnot edit my own talk page? --Pinaki ghosh 08:49, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pinaki, Wikipedia is a platform to share knowledge, but certainly not a platform to spread false information and misguide others. But you are doing here such prohibited activities to promote your father (Prabir Ghosh). Isn't it, Mr. Junior Ghosh? Just giving one example, you with the joint hand of your father intentionaly misinterpreted Wikipedia to fox a TV channel (Kolkata TV) into broadcasting "Prabir Ghosh: World's number one rationalist as per Wikipedia" as a hard news. And you Pinaki played a major role to do such worst activity (If one is new here can see Talk:Prabir Ghosh). Is it an instance of your "constructive editing"? You and your father are cleaverly abusing the increasing popularity of Wikipedia. So I am putting my effort to open your original mouth behind the mask. Sukanta

Stop making a fool of yourself. If you are a true man, come face to face with me, rather than hiding behind your computer and playing pranks; vandalizing; spreading false news. And what false information are you pointing to? Be a man enough to speak the truth. I am an author of some of the best books on cybercrimes, some of which are international publications (my profile has details), and people consult me, and value my advices to solve cybercrimes and arrest criminals behind them; ever since I wrote the book. The Bengali language news item you are pointing to was a case where my co-operation were sought to solve a cybercrime case; since I had once been a journalist with the UK media that carried out that sting operation. --Pinaki ghosh 06:04, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you then again and again deletings my writings from your discussion page, if you are so confident about yourself? You can make stupid the media such as Kolkata TV and so many common people, but cannot certainly do the same to the wikipedians. --Sukanta Das 10:40, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

Sukanta: Wikipedia is not the place for a personal vendatta, as you seem to have with regards to Prabir and Pinaki Ghosh. See Wikipedia:No personal attacks. For the moment, I'm warning both you and Pinaki, but further activity such as on Talk:Prabir Ghosh will be considered vandalism. I have issued Pinaki a similar warning. If you must feud, use email, not the Wiki. Michaelbusch 15:24, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You claimed, I did "personal attack"s against someone. Can you give me a single instance, which can really show I have done personal attack against Ghosh? Did I through any harsh word to Ghosh and his company? I would like to know. I think you are matured enough to distinguish what is a personal attack and what is an argument. Michaelbusch, you are doing some mistakes, please read again the whole discussion carefully. --Sukanta Das 15:39, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Flaming is strongly discouraged, and yes, you have become very vocal in your exchanges with Pinaki Ghosh and the other advocates of Prabir. Now, Pinaki has a serious conflict of interest with the Prabir Ghosh article, and the article must be guarded against this, but your postings to Talk:Prabir Ghosh are lengthly and at times seem designed to provoke Pinaki/Prabir's admirers. That is a personal attack. That Pinaki is flaming more than you is not a justification, although I'm going to be recommending him for a short block. Also, there seems to be a sockpuppet network in use, and we'll be tracing the puppetmaster. Michaelbusch 17:00, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You were warned against flaming and personal attacks. Stop now. Michaelbusch 16:42, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. Any further flaming (that is personal attacks and deliberately inflammatory posts) will be reason for a block from editing. Michaelbusch 18:03, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your intension is clear

Why are you trying to promote Prabir Ghosh? You are abusing wikipedia, Mr. Michaelbusch. You never raised questions about the false claim of Ghosh. I gave sufficient document as well as arguments to demask Ghosh. However, you are not interested with those things but interested to delete all proofs that expose Ghosh. What do you want to show the world? Ghosh is very genuine? What is your intension? --Sukanta Das 12:36, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am not trying to promote Ghosh - if you peruse the edit history of the article, you will see that I have removed a lot of material that was overly laudatory. I also do not condone all of his tactics. But posting 50 kilobytes of text that consists in large part of personal attacks and in other ways seems designed to be inflammatory is unacceptable. If you can reduce the volume of your posts by at least a factor of ten, discuss the matter with civility, and stop insulting other editors & their families (do remember that Ghosh's son is an editor - that is a COI, but an understandable one), then your concerns will be clearer and can be addressed. But if you continue to post such verbose and inflammatory statements, I'll have to recommend you for a block. Michaelbusch 17:28, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry Michelbusch but have to tell, you don’t understand the meaning of personal attacks very well. I told you before, and am again repeating, informing facts about a person with documents is not a personal attack. If you are still not convinced, that is, if you still think telling truth about a fake person is a personal attack, we then need to sit together for a long discuss about the matter. Secondly, it’s my wonder, being a computer user in present days you are so worried with 50 KB data which actually states many facts! If are really worried about the space, delete the whole page of this fake person. And Michel, you are very concerned about Pinaki! Are you concerned about this wikipedia and its goodwill? Pinaki played with the goodwill of this wikipedia. I mentioned all these things in the discussion page (which you have deleted) and probably told you personally. Well, I am telling the fact again:

Pinaki Ghosh played a key role to promote his father in wikipedia. Pinaki added Ghosh’s name at the beginning of a list of ‘notable rationalists’ maintained in Rationalist movement page, based on which Kolkata TV broadcasted news on June 11, 2007 that Wikipedia had ranked Prabir Ghosh as World's number one rationalist. Prabir as well as Pinaki were involved to abuse the media. They still maintain a site claiming the same. To check, visit the following link [1]. Michel, have you raised a single question about this thing? Before reply me, you please try to understand the motive of “editor” Pinaki.

I never insult anyone. Again I am sorry to say, you don’t understand the meaning of insulting.--Sukanta Das 10:19, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. — madman bum and angel 19:19, 8 November 2007 (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).

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

Request reason:

This is totally unjustified. I put my discussion about an article (article on Prabir Ghosh). The article contains many wrong informations which I pointed out. When I put my arguments, lots of harsh words were thrown at me. And then, all my posts were deleted. I dont know what are the problems with me. Can I not point out, if I find several wrong informations presented in an article about a living person (like Prabir Ghosh), and if I find someone is abusing wikipedia?

Decline reason:

You are not currently blocked. The block expired several days ago. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 10:28, 14 November 2007 (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.

Image:DANA.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:DANA.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 05:35, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:IMA1.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:IMA1.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Jordan 1972 (talk) 23:12, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:IMA2.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:IMA2.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Jordan 1972 (talk) 23:13, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:DSS1.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:DSS1.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MBisanz ^talk 01:48, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:DSS2.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:DSS2.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MBisanz ^talk 01:48, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Police1.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Police1.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MBisanz ^talk 04:30, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]