User talk:Suman Kumar Mallick

Sources

Hello, can you please add WP:INLINECITED sources to Suman Kumar Mallick, it's likely to be deleted as it is. 'External links' means suggestions for further reading rather than sources used to inform the article. Without clear sources, we don't keep articles on living people. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 13:34, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Suman Kumar Mallick for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Suman Kumar Mallick is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Suman Kumar Mallick until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Boleyn (talk) 14:26, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

January 2018

Welcome to Wikipedia. Constructive contributions are appreciated, but, in this edit to Suman Kumar Mallick, you removed Articles for deletion notices from articles or removed other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates. This makes it difficult to establish consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. Thank you. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:45, 19 January 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).

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

Request reason:

This page is block by mistake

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇} 18:34, 20 January 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.

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Suman Kumar Mallick/sandbox

A tag has been placed on your user page, User:Suman Kumar Mallick/sandbox, 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 blatant advertising which only promotes or publicises a company, product, group or service. 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. L3X1 Become a New Page Patroller! (distænt write) 22:35, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request for unblocking my wiki account

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).

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

Request reason:

I am sorry for my actions but what I have done I didnot know that it was wrong.Please unblock my account for the last time.Please.

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 14:02, 21 January 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.

Further, do not create additional accounts for any purpose—including to petition for an unblock, as you did with Suman K. Mallick (talk · contribs) —C.Fred (talk) 04:53, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User has continued to engage in block evasion, as S. K. Mallick (talk · contribs). --Yamla (talk) 14:35, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And BiharPradesh (talk · contribs). --Yamla (talk) 14:37, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And S.K.Mallick India (talk · contribs). Block evasion is happening frequently enough that I won't continue to report it here. --Yamla (talk) 18:09, 22 January 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).

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

Request reason:

Sir I want to say that I am sorry for the mistakes I made.Please unblock the page "Suman Kumar Mallick". I will only use one account when you unblock.Sir this is the last time I ask. I want to add further informations about me and add some more references and inline citation.I deserve to have Wikiepedia article. I am Sorry.Sir,kindly unblock my account. Suman Kumar Mallick Sorry (talk) 18:12, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

So you will stop evading the block if we unblock you. Sorry, that's not a meaningful agreement to comply with Wikipedia's policies. Due to the legal threat here I have extended this block indefinitely. While you are, of course, welcome to pursue legal means if you so wish, you are not welcome to edit Wikipedia at the same time. Beyond the other issues you need to address, you will need to unequivocally retract the legal threat if you wish to edit Wikipedia. See WP:No legal threats for details. Huon (talk) 18:54, 22 January 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.

Suman, you need to STOP MAKING NEW ACCOUNTS. Every time you do this it only makes it worse for you. If you were to make a request where you 1) promise not to make any more new accounts, and 2) promise not to remove the "proposed deletion" and "conflict of interest" tags from the article, only to improve it - it might be considered. People are looking to see if you understand what you did wrong: creating false accounts, and removing tags from the page. The fact that you are breaking the rules to make these requests only makes it more likely that your request will be refused. --MelanieN (talk) 18:20, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Even though your main account, User:Suman Kumar Mallick, is blocked, I think you can still edit this page. Try it! --MelanieN (talk) 18:27, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll add that, in order to get unblocked, you should also either provide proof of identity via WP:OTRS, or request a change of username via Special:GlobalRenameRequest. Your username is the name of a well-known living person, and I'm sure you'll understand that we should make sure that the person using that name indeed is that well-known person and not some impostor. See WP:IMPERSONATE for details. Huon (talk) 18:54, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This user is now taking the approach that this account has been hacked. See User talk:Junior Kumar Mallick. Although obviously untrue, WP:COMPROMISED may now apply. --Yamla (talk) 23:44, 23 January 2018 (UTC) [reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Suman Kumar Mallick (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #20453 was submitted on Jan 27, 2018 15:26:41. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 15:26, 27 January 2018 (UTC) [reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Suman Kumar Mallick (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #20464 was submitted on Jan 28, 2018 15:22:15. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 15:22, 28 January 2018 (UTC) [reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Suman Kumar Mallick (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #20491 was submitted on Jan 31, 2018 18:29:21. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 18:29, 31 January 2018 (UTC) [reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Suman Kumar Mallick (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #20571 was submitted on Feb 08, 2018 14:30:48. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 14:30, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request for unblock

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).

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

Request reason:

Sir,When you put a block on me , I didn't know anything about Wikipedia's terms and conditions but now I have completely understood it.Sir now I know that I must not make multiple accounts,so please unblock my account.

Decline reason:

Per unaddressed issues raised in Yamla's comments below -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 16:37, 10 February 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.

That may be true, but you knew about WP:NPA and continued making legal threats. You knew about WP:BLOCK and WP:SOCK and continued setting up accounts to get around your block. You knew about WP:COPYRIGHT and continued to violate copyright. And you knew about WP:COI, WP:PAID, and WP:PROMO and continued violating them. And that's not considering the several cases where you outright lied. Your unblock request will have to be substantially more convincing than this. You've been one of the most abusive editors around in the weeks you've had your account and still haven't addressed this abuse, nor even remotely attempted to convince us your future edits would be clear of the multiple violations you've committed so far. Most other unblock request I have seen from you state you plan to continue violating WP:COI, for example. --Yamla (talk) 12:45, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sir,I didn't know about any of the offence that you have stated but now I have understood all of them including - [WP:NPA] , [WP:BLOCK],[WP:SOCK],[WP:COPYRIGHT],[WP:COI],[WP:PAID], and [WP:PROMO] and I will not repeat any of these violence again. Please unblock my account. Suman Kumar Mallick (talk) 15:13, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is just not true. You did know about those policies while you were violating them, because we told you about them over and over again. I'll also note that all of your contributions have been in violation of WP:COI and WP:PAID. Now that you claim you understand this, how would your future edits differ from your past edits? What sort of articles would you edit if we unblocked you? What sort of articles would you stay away from, now that you claim to understand these policies? And, just as importantly, when was the last time you engaged in WP:BLOCK evasion? --Yamla (talk) 15:22, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sir,Now I will not make multiple accounts and I will not spread vandalism on any wiki page . I will just make my own biopage on wikipedia because I am a senior political figure in India. Suman Kumar Mallick (talk) 03:54, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No you won't. Because we aren't going to unblock you to continue your violations of WP:COI, WP:PAID, and WP:PROMO. That would be totally inappropriate and shows you were not telling the truth when you said you would stop violating WP:COI. You will not be unblocked to write about yourself, as we've told you over and over and over again. --Yamla (talk) 12:53, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request for some help

Sir , I want to ask you that how can I be unblocked again . Sir I was blocked by a mistake about which I didn't know . Can you please tell me that how can I be unblocked again . Suman Kumar Mallick (talk) 16:46, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Stop claiming you didn't know. You did know. We told you over and over and over again. Heck, you've continued to engage in violations of WP:BLOCK and WP:SOCK this month. You will not be unblocked until you demonstrate you understand why your edits were inappropriate, demonstrate a clear understanding of WP:COI, WP:PAID, WP:PROMO, WP:AUTOBIO, WP:SOCK, and WP:BLOCK, all of which you continue to violate. You will need to agree to refrain from writing about yourself or about your political party. You'll need to explain what sorts of edits you'll make instead. Please note that I'm tempted at this point to revoke talk page access here. I can't tell if this is a problem with WP:IDHT or with WP:CIR but either way, please consider that you get only one more chance to make an unblock request that shows you have read and understood all of those policies, and addresses all of the concerns I have raised here. One more chance. And for crying out loud, stop claiming this was a mistake or that you didn't know about our policies. You did. Own up to it. --Yamla (talk) 16:55, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request for unblock

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).

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

Request reason:

Sir , under WP:Blocks it is stated that Blocks are used to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia . I accept that I deleted the deletion template from my own biography . I accept that I spread vandalism . But , now I have understood that this is not right and promise that I will not repeat any kind of these actions again. Under WP:Sock , it is stated that we cannot make multiple accounts . I accept that I have created more than one accounts . All of them are blocked . But , Now I have understood this whole policy and promise that I will not make multiple accounts in future . I have understood that under WP:COI , we cannot make contribution to Wikipedia about ourselves , family , friends , clients , employers or our relationships . I accept my fault under this criteria that I created my autobiography . I promise that I will not violate it any more . Sir , I just created my own biography,so,WP:Paid donot arise . But , if you have found any thing in my behaviour that violates this guideline - WP:Paid , then I am sorry for my actions . I promise that I will not repeat that violation again . After studying WP:Promo , I have understood that Wikipedia is not a soapbox or a stage for advertising . I accept that I advertised myself on Wikipedia . But , I promise that I will not violate WP:Promo any more . Under WP:AUTOBIO , I have completely understood that we cannot write our autobiography in Wikipedia . I have completely understood that this is a violation . I have also understood that it is a violation under conflict of interest too . I want to clearly say that I will not repeat any of the violations stated in WP:AUTOBIO . I will not write about myself or my political party any more . Atlast , Sir , I want to say that if I am unblocked , then , I will try to improve the articles about whom I have some knowledge . I will try to help Wikipedia as far as possible . Sir , I am a passionate Wikipedian and I will try to help Wikipedia in improving its articles . Sir , please unblock my account for the first and last time , I will not violate any of the guidelines in future .Suman Kumar Mallick (talk) 08:57, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

That's a lot of text, but it doesn't get to the heart of what caused the block in the first place. You clearly have not been here to create an encyclopedia, but write about yourself. RickinBaltimore (talk) 13:48, 8 March 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.

As you have refused to "explain what sorts of edits you'll make instead", I have revoked your talk page access. However, it's possible your unblock request may be sufficiently convincing for an admin to decide to lift your block. --Yamla (talk) 12:23, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock discussion

Nicely verbose unblock appeal. However, this was not a simple mistake. It is part of an ongoing, continual, unrelenting disruption of Wikipedia via abuse of multiple accounts and recreation of articles about the same subject (you) under a variety of titles. You have been told this many, many times. Above you write, "I want to add further informations about me and add some more references and inline citation.I deserve to have Wikiepedia article}" (sic). Wikipedia articles are not a reward; no one deserves one. Your insistence (obsession?) on having one is disruptive, non-constructive, and WP:nothere behavior. Please find some other venue on which to write about yourself.--Dlohcierekim (talk) 10:57, 8 March 2018 (UTC) Oh, for the love of, well, me. How many times can you claim, "Sir,When you put a block on me , I didn't know anything about Wikipedia's terms and conditions but now I have completely understood it.Sir now I know that I must not make multiple accounts,so please unblock my account"? Really?--Dlohcierekim (talk) 10:59, 8 March 2018 (UTC) [reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Suman Kumar Mallick (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #20823 was submitted on Mar 10, 2018 16:50:16. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 16:50, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have now blocked them from sending email. This has wasted enough of everybody's time. --MelanieN (talk) 20:08, 10 March 2018 (UTC) [reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Suman Kumar Mallick (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #21571 was submitted on May 20, 2018 05:12:40. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 05:12, 20 May 2018 (UTC) [reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Suman Kumar Mallick (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #21641 was submitted on May 26, 2018 04:26:24. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 04:26, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ban evasion

This user has engaged in ban evasion as of August, 2018. --Yamla (talk) 18:53, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User has threatened to continue setting up sockpuppet accounts to evade their block. Not the first time they've threatened this, and the user tends to follow through on these threats. --Yamla (talk) 19:25, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This user has engaged in ban evasion and posted targeted sexually explicit content in an attempt to harass me, in September 2018 as Suman Mallick IND POL (talk · contribs). --Yamla (talk) 20:36, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This user has issued a legal threat in an attempt to stop people reverting his additions. See User talk:27.72.50.126. --Hammersoft (talk) 22:19, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This user has engaged in ban evasion as of December 2018. --Yamla (talk) 14:39, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This user has engaged in ban evasion and legal threats as of January, 2019. --Yamla (talk) 14:23, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Further ban evasion in May, 2019. --Yamla (talk) 13:16, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Suman Kumar Mallick for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Suman Kumar Mallick is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Suman Kumar Mallick (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Misterrrrr (talk) 05:46, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]