User talk:Kashish pall

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Kashish pall. 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, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
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 are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to 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 Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. kingboyk (talk) 13:50, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is my one of the big mistake;

This is on my talk page because I found that there is a button G13 where we can re open the pages. I appeal for Sandeep Maheshwari then there is a tag which is written that I didn't put draft . So I think I have to appeal again as Draft Sandeep Maheshwari . That's why other users say what I am doing.Kashish pall (talk) 13:10, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is on user bri this is a leading reason on my talk page. I come to know at very late and always think to do best editing here. quora Kashish pall (talk) 17:18, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

February 2020

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Ashtavakra Gita, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 15:35, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Youtuber Sandeep Maheshwari has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Youtuber Sandeep Maheshwari. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 15:37, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Although I tried to submit source where I got information but system didn't allow me to put the references in links. Please reply me back for such explaination. Kashish pall (talk) 16:06, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - I'm following up on the queries you had on RHaworth's talk page. I've looked at the draft, which is currently unsourced and so cannot possibly be accepted. It looks from the draft that you are attempting to use his YouTube channel and his own personal website as sources - the draft will not be accepted unless you can identify a few reliable, independent and secondary sources that given the subject significant coverage. This is discussed at length at WP:GNG, which I already linked you to. You've said above that the system didn't allow you to put the references in links - what sites were you attempting to reference? What error message did you get when you tried to add them? GirthSummit _(blether) 17:04, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There are three links but if I replied and give those links in text still not allowed to reply back Kashish pall (talk) 17:24, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

System don't allow me to give links even on this reply Kashish pall (talk) 17:45, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kashish pall, what message is it giving you - does mention the blacklist? GirthSummit _(blether) 17:50, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is so Kashish pall (talk) 17:52, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In which case the references would not be useable. Theroadislong (talk) 17:54, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

indeed - you are trying to use a website which has been banned from Wikipedia because of repeated attempts to spam links to it. It is not the sort of source you should be using. Read those links I gave you and try again (or give up, if better sources aren't available). GirthSummit _(blether) 17:56, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

All the first three references which I wrote in the draft. I tried all three and all get such this. Kashish pall (talk) 17:57, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kashish pall, if they are blacklisted, you can't use them. Find better sources, or give up on this. GirthSummit _(blether) 17:59, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this, but I have one more query regarding this. May I give references of videos of YouTube and news channels because he is a YouTube celebrate and maximum of information gether by YouTube. One more problem is that he is a kind of person who didn't go for interviews and rejecte their request. His mouth words is a reference. If I give references of any other sites those are generally frod. His mouth words are only true. He explained his whole life story on his own channel. So may I give references of YouTube videos but not of his own channel but the references videos also included him. Because his only words are true. So what I have to do in such situation ? Kashish pall (talk) 03:50, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I will not give any link because it may cause trouble. So I only write references in words. May I do so ? Kashish pall (talk) 04:13, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've deleted this page. It is not acceptable to circumvent creation protection of a page by creating a slightly variant title. See also my reply to you at User talk:Spinningspark#About draft Sandeep Maheshwari. SpinningSpark 20:56, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

https://g.co/kgs/474KQR. Google itself is a proof Kashish pall (talk) 17:36, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to sign posts

Please remember to sign Talk posts with four tildes ~~~~ SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:43, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

March 2020

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Wikipedia talk:Teahouse, appears to have been inappropriate, and has been reverted. Please feel free to use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Your message was on the wrong page. Please read what it says at the top of the page which you were editing. David Biddulph (talk) 16:38, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sandeep Maheshwari

Hi Kashish pall. I noticed your question on RoySmith's talkpage and looked into it. Sandeep Maheshwari has been created and deleted multiple times for use of promotional language and lack of independent reliable sources. However, on doing a Google search it appears he is well known in India, though less well known in the West. Most sources are Indian newspapers, which do not have the same quality control as Western papers, but there is some evidence that this person is notable. I will work with you on this.

First stage is to create a subpage for us to work on the article together. Here it is: User:Kashish pall/Sandeep Maheshwari. The next stage is to do some research and reading to gather reliable sources which talk about Sandeep Maheshwari. We can put links to these sources on the page I created. And then we can start to build the article using those sources. There is no guarantee that we will be able to create an article to meet Wikipedia's inclusion criteria, but we can try! SilkTork (talk) 10:07, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I very well known him and his popularity is on height in our country as well the country in our surroundings. The country who knows Hindi language watch his videos with full of interest. And I want to work on this title more than 10 days. But I also found that this title under protection due to the commercial use as you told. If you saw that it may be possible that it will create the criteria of Wikipedia or not. I think this will definitely because there is a YouTuber Bhuvan bam whoes article seen on Wikipedia and Sandeep Maheshwari is almost near about him. Kashish pall (talk) 14:43, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please also give me the structure for source because I tried but I couldn't make the format which you could do on source page. Kashish pall (talk) 14:44, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are going to need to put some effort in. If you can't acquire basic formatting yourself, then this is going to be difficult for both of us. To see how someone has done something, you can click on "Edit" (or "Edit source" if that shows for you as well) at the top of the page, and you can see how it is done. Use your sandbox (see WP:SANDBOX) to try out formats, and how to write. If you want to learn more, you can search for guidance and advice on Wikipedia by using the search box and putting "WP:" before the word or phrase you want help on. Such as WP:Sources, or WP:Structure. If the words you use don't work, or take you to the wrong place, try something else such as WP:Format, or WP:Layout. Read the pages careful, and follow links. Unfortunately Wikipedia is not easy to use for everyone. If you find it too difficult, then, no worries, you can just gather the evidence, and present it at Wikipedia:Requested articles/Biography/By nationality.

Some useful links for you to read and study: Help:Editing, Help:Your first article, Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia, Help:Introduction and Wikipedia:Competence is required. SilkTork (talk) 16:21, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Although you says that I don't have to put my name I also don't want so but this is happening because I don't know how to do it so but I am doing work on it and need someone time to learn codes. But don't worry I know how to use codes because I also completed course on C language in outer world . I only need time to work as the criteria of Wikipedia. Kashish pall (talk) 17:43, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The information about his father, mother ,etc.come from the report alive which is already sourced . Kashish pall (talk) 17:45, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is there an article on Sandeep Maheshwari on the Indian Wikipedia? SilkTork (talk) 18:54, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is this the same person: Sandeep Maheshwari (Q29354628)? If so, the Wikidata entry shows an article at https://or.wikipedia.org/s/14ek which has 7 references. Also a Commons category: c:Category:Sandeep Maheshwari Cheers --RexxS (talk) 00:59, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sandeep Maheshwari (Q29354628). Yes this person is same. But wrong date is mentioned. 8 is written but it is 28. Kashish pall (talk) 05:45, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sandeep Maheshwari is on Indian Wikipedia in Bengali language. Kashish pall (talk) 05:51, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks RexxS. That's very useful. Kashish pall, can you translate the Bengali article onto the /Sandeep Maheshwari page, along with the references. I'll check the references for that article, and the references we have already collected, and tidy up the language, and then we'll see what we've got. SilkTork (talk) 09:18, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry all the references are in english. Kashish pall (talk) 12:04, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm looking at it myself right now. I note that four cites are to Sandeep Maheshwari's own website, and three to his YouTube channel. Those are not acceptable for establishing notability, and need to be used with care in building the article. I would prefer we didn't use those sources at all, given the controversial history of trying to get an article on him onto the English Wikipedia (it has been deleted seven times: [1] and protected so only an admin (such as myself) can create it again). I'll put a machine translation, along with the cites used, on the /Sandeep Maheshwari page, as I can see you are struggling with that. SilkTork (talk) 17:04, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Are you still interested in creating this article? If so, I would be willing to advise you. The deletion review you initiated decided not to undelete the article in mainspace, but left it open over whether a draft could be created. SpinningSpark 15:03, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Spinningspark I really don't know why actually deletion log is used but because you says I did this. I found you was unsatisfied with my notability reason. But in deletion log the discussion is closed then how may I tell anything further. Kashish pall (talk) 10:28, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My question was simple enough – do you wish to proceed with creating an article, yes or no? If yes, I can help by unlocking the draft page. SpinningSpark 14:27, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Spinningspark I am interested to work with this. Me and SilkTork already start creating it on talk page. So I really need draft space. If it is helpful for creation then you can open the draft. Kashish pall (talk) 14:38, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, ok, I had not realised that was happening. I've unsalted the draftspace page and moved the new draft there. SpinningSpark 15:28, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We are not ready for draftspace yet User:Spinningspark - I'm still working with User:Kashish pall in their user space to establish if the sources are enough to create a meaningful article, and if the sources are reliable. When we are ready to move things further on, I will be able to do that myself. Would you please return the pages to User:Kashish pall's user space. If you wish to help out there, please do. I have stalled a little, as I've been caught up in other things off-Wiki, so having another experienced user able to examine the sources, and help build the article would be useful. The material that is there is mostly machine translated over from the Bengali-Wiki article, and is not encyclopedic material. That was for me to see what the Bengali-Wiki article had to say, and what sources they were using. Think of it mainly as notes toward a draft, rather than an actual draft! Regards. SilkTork (talk) 16:43, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's OK, I've done it, as I intend to do some work on it this afternoon. SilkTork (talk) 16:49, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, sorry for poking my nose in. I just didn't want a protected draft page to stand in the way of an article being worked on by an experienced editor. SpinningSpark 18:22, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That's cool, you wanted to help out. It's not as easy a task as I first thought, as while there are LOTS of sources, on checking them out it turns out that most are blogs, wikis or self-published, and not reliable. There appears to be an entrepreneurial attitude among Indians that drives a number of them to create websites which mirror other websites with very little in the way of fact checking. I thought I had a useful source here: [2], but it turns out that it's a vanity book: [3]. I think Sandeep Maheshwari's notability is very borderline, and mostly driven by energetic self-promotion. When we move it into mainspace, I will immediately submit it to AfD to get community consensus on the notability as I'm finding it difficult to judge. SilkTork (talk) 18:40, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kashish pall - you recreated the draft article after I had restored it to your userpage, so I have protected it again. Please only work in your userspace until we are ready to proceed further. Problems can be created by pushing forward with this article before it is ready as we have not yet established notability. SilkTork (talk) 16:59, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, okay. Kashish pall (talk) 10:41, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SilkTork I found this link when I was watching for Wikimedia commance. I think this will help us. The title we are working on I found on Palak Padariya . I think the user didn't full fill the need of Wikipedia. But I think we do and use reliable sources from here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Palak_Padariya/sandbox Kashish pall (talk) 10:46, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I caught up the problem and that is we are finding difficulty in notobality the reason is he himself. Because although lots of newspaper want to take his interview but he is the person who reject all the offers . Thousand of mails come to him but he rejecte them . I think this is a biggest cause to find notobality reasons difficult for us. Kashish pall (talk) 10:09, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Kashish pall: you seem to know a lot of things about Sandeep Maheshwari, like the mail he receives. Are you personally connected in some way? ☆ Bri (talk) 00:08, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, actually he mentioned on his site. www.sandeepmaheshwari.comKashish pall (talk) 06:24, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not finding what you described. Can you give us a more exact URL? ☆ Bri (talk) 16:22, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

www.sandeepmaheshwari.com this is same written in his article. Kashish pall (talk) 07:03, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In start I really don't know what I have to do and how to do only SilkTork teaches me in very good manner that's why I know and understand everything thing here. Thank you SilkTork. Your friendly behaviour give me relief and trust on Wikipedia. I don't know whether you know me or not. Whether you read my user page or not. I am very young in age and achieve the big things. Although you told me that I am very slow learner and lack of skills only because of my young age. Today I feel at very less age I achieved huge thing and today I feel because of you. Thank you so much. You told me that I have to move on from the title from Sandeep Maheshwari that's why I chose next title and they claim me as sock pepetery . The claim is actually not true. I only have single account but still blocked me . You are really good teacher. ThankKashish pall (talk) 14:42, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@SilkTork: I really feel that you have used very good source to create Sandeep Maheshwari title and I feel that it get delete. I feel your good research fails within ten days. And even when I asked you to let me create you says no about it and told me to move on. And the next title made me blocked for six months. As I told you that I have joined for very short period of time so there is no guarantee whether I will come back or not after six months. So I did few searches on Sandeep Maheshwari and I found this [4][5] if it is possible to create the title again you can create it. I could not trust on un experienced editiors ( special of our country) . They try to create again and again these titles like they did with Sandeep Maheshwari, Harsh Beniwal and Amit Bhadana. They repeatedly try to create the article and they are un experience and made other users blocked or create trouble for another user who want to build the title and wants to contribute constructive. I think you are very well known these things. I don't want to left Sandeep Maheshwari title for someone else they will not construct good article and led to the one more delete for the title. I hope you understand. Kashish pall (talk) 06:44, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have checked your new sources and they add no new information. The first uses the promotional language that is part of the concern, the second source I already had in the article. That the first one is in Hindi is suggestive that Sandeep Maheshwari is more a topic for the Hindi Wikipedia than the English one. SilkTork (talk) 07:14, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@SilkTork: I try to find more good sources so I found this BW afaqs . I hope this is helpful to create good article. First one is in depth coverage. That time we don't have that and second one is new. I tried my best on the search. Kashish pall (talk) 14:52, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You need to stop this now Kashish pall. You haven't taken in what I have said to you. 1) Sandeep Maheshwari is not notable enough for the English Wikipedia. 2) There is a long history of poor sourcing and poor quality and promotional article writing by people who are uncritical fans of Sandeep Maheshwari, which means that we are now very prejudiced against any attempt to recreate an article on the topic. 3) The lack of notability combined with the article history means that something VERY SIGNIFICANT would need to change before an article could be attempted. Offering me more of the same stuff is not helpful. 4) And please do take this one in. I am not interested in attempting another article on Sandeep Maheshwari, but I am prepared to assist if you leave the matter alone for AT LEAST six months, AND there are significant reliable new sources writing about Sandeep Maheshwari.

To put that clearly and simply: Do not ping me for at least six months. And then ONLY if you have at least FIVE new sources which you have checked via Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard are acceptable on the English Wikipedia. If you ping me before six months are up or if you don't have at least five reliable sources that you have checked via WP:RSN, then I will not be happy. Is that understood? SilkTork (talk) 20:35, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Image on Commons

I am looking for an image of Maheshwari that we can use in the article, so I look in Commons and find this: File:Sandeep Maheshwari.jpg which was uploaded by yourself a few days ago, and which you claim is your "own work". It appears to be a professional photograph which Maheshwari uses on his Facebook page: [6] and his YouTube page: [7]. If you took the photograph, then yes you own it, and can upload it. But if you didn't take the photo, then it belongs to Maheshwari and we can't have in on Commons or Wikipedia. If you took the photograph, I assume you would have uploaded it directly. But you uploaded it from Facebook. Did you take the photo? SilkTork (talk) 18:51, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your meaning is capturing the photo . If yes , then I didn't captured the photo but taken from the Facebook. But that time I get confused about commons policy. And when I checked every one writing "own work" that's why I wrote that. Kashish pall (talk) 10:48, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It will need to be deleted as the image doesn't belong to you. I'm not an admin on Commons, so I can't do that. I'll set up a deletion discussion request. SilkTork (talk) 17:15, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, okay if the file violet the copyright then definitely it should be deleted. I am agree with you. Kashish pall (talk) 07:19, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sandeep Maheshwari

I have put the article in mainspace, Sandeep Maheshwari, and listed it on AfD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sandeep Maheshwari. We'll see what happens. SilkTork (talk) 12:00, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: User:Kashish pall/sandbox has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at User:Kashish pall/sandbox. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 09:09, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@TheroadislongI am not creating article but I am just watching and use my sandbox Kashish pall (talk) 09:12, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May I remove your comment from my sandbox because it is create trouble for me?Kashish pall (talk) 09:25, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

April 2020

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. This is just a note to let you know that I've moved the draft that you were working on to Draft:Harsh Beniwal, from its old location at User:Kashish pall/sandbox. This has been done because the Draft namespace is the preferred location for Articles for Creation submissions. Please feel free to continue to work on it there. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to ask me on my talk page. Thank you. Sulfurboy (talk) 05:27, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Harsh Beniwal (April 15)

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

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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:Harsh Beniwal 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:Harsh Beniwal, 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, 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.

GSS ^💬 05:34, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a suspected sock puppet of Swarup Kumar Solanki (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · logs · block log · arb · rfc · lta · SPI · cuwiki) that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this is a sock puppet account, and your original account is blocked, please also note that banned or blocked users are not allowed to edit Wikipedia; and all edits made under this account may be reverted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:30, 15 April 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).

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

Request reason:

this is really miss understanding I only have one account and I never make any account of the name Swarup Kumar Solanki (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · logs · block log · arb · rfc · lta · SPI^confirmed_suspected)

Decline reason:

Behavioural and/or technical evidence strongly suggests that this account is a sockpuppet. Simple denial is not considered a sufficient reason to unblock the account. In order to be unblocked, you will need to convince the reviewing administrator that there is a better explanation for this apparent connection than the abuse of multiple accounts. Yunshui ^雲 _水 13:45, 15 April 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 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).

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

Request reason:

I have seen that the reason you have blocked me because one user try to make the tittle on Harsh Beniwal and pass through AFC. But in past time lots of user try to make the same tittle as the tittle is famous but not make article according to Wikipedia. So only thoughts are same but it didn't mean the person is same. But you have still confusion please check my ip address. If I am on Wikipedia I fully respect it and it's policy. Several times I have logged out from Wikipedia and log in with same name. But if I want to violet the policy on that time I creat new account. But I didn't do so because I fully respect the policy of Wikipedia

Adding to this you can check my contribution on another titles like on Sandeep Maheshwari, Draft Radhagupta,Ashoka,Bhuvan Bam ,etc. I hope my thinking is not match with one of the blocked user

One more thing I want to tell you that if I am a multiple user account then definitely I know how to submit article . Then why I ask on Teahouse about it. "One more question about submit".

I have go more through it. There is a user who created multiple accounts and try to make the title which I have created. I want to tell you that there are two topics Harsh Beniwal and Amit Bhadana both are famous Youtubers of India and further creation on the title will be possible on Wikipedia. You can check it on Google as well. The band user left problem for another user who want to do something constructive. Please you also aware about the famous title anyone can work on the famous title. So please think about it and once check on Google about the famous titles.

Behaviour of banned user. I checked the behaviour of banned user. I found that when banned user having account when he was Vikas. Bikaner he used tick request system for unblock. Then he was as Mr Teja he run away and didn't appeal further because he knows that he is doing wrong.* He don't know how to address codes by his behaviour. *He didn't learn anything except make new account. * Create problems for other users. * Only know how to create article through AFC.

If I am same then I also don't know how to use codes properly but have you note that I didn't learn anything from here. When I called as sock pepetery then I also run from there on the time. But I didn't do so because I believe that I am not doing anything wrong and work constructively here. Which is actually show my contribution itself.

Mistakes of banned user. I countered what mistake he has done. While creating article on Harsh Beniwal and Amit Bhadana he use the term Harsh Beniwal (Youtuber), Amit Bhadana (Youtuber). He didn't understand that he could not make the title on main space because both are salted. So first he have to persue through deletion log and open the draft first. His all attempts get fail because while creating WP:BLP need special attention.

I know all the consequences that's why I use my sandbox to create article and I know it definitely get rejecte because BLP is not easy task and further I am going to ask departments how I created the topic.

most important. I seriously forgot to mention most important thing which I have to disclose at very first. As I tell you that I was working on the title Sandeep Maheshwari . I want to learn how to make article on Youtubers. So I want for Bhuvan Bam and check about creater and then I want for Ashish Chanchalani and it's creater and I found on the creater's page someone requesting to create title of Amit Bhadana and it was none of the other but blocked user Vikas. Bikaner . I found that he was blocked but that time I don't know why he is blocked. I went to his page and I found the title he created get deleted Harsh Beniwal. I think that anyone can make Harsh Beniwal as he is famous Youtuber. I captured the idea of creation on the topic from their. But I really don't know that banned user make several attempts to make same kind of article with another name like Mr Teja.

Sorry to waste your time to write again and again but I feel that I have to tell this as it is most important. Actually I was really not willing to make article on the title but everyone told me to move on that's why I chose the title. And when title get decline I was really not interested on the title to work on that's why I press G7 on draft . As you can see in the draft itself Draft Harsh Beniwal as you can see that I applied G7 on the date 15 April. This shows that I was not willing to work on the title further and want to left it. If I am same then definitely willing to work. Kashish pall (talk) 13:28, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Hi Kashish pall, when there is uncertainty whether a party is one user with sockpuppets or several users with similar editing habits they may be treated as one user with sockpuppets. This has happened here. There also seem to be communication/language problems. If you have absolutely no connection to the blocked accounts, you can edit a different Wikipedia in a language more familiar to you (meta:List of Wikipedias). Before appealing this block at the English Wikipedia, please read WP:SOCKBLOCK and WP:Standard Offer. You will currently not be unblocked on the English Wikipedia. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 03:19, 19 April 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.

@ToBeFree: I really feel difficult to appeal further because it get two times decline. So I need your little help more. I can only say in my request that I can work to prevent from vandalism but I don't know whether this reason is sufficient or not. I need little more help to appeal the block. Kashish pall (talk) 13:32, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kashish pall, please really consider using a different Wikipedia (meta:List of Wikipedias). It may not be possible to unblock you here. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 13:37, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@ToBeFree: Thank you. I will definitely join that . But I really feel that I didn't even violet any policy by creating different account but still I get blocked as sock pepetery the claim which is not true. So trust on the editor definitely decline and such blocking will not create an trust on other meta list even. It feels that the purpose of violantering work also get diminish. And further trust generated becomes almost impossible. I hope you understand. Sometimes co-incidence happen and in my case it is happened so. But type of guilt generated by blocking for indefinitely which become more painfull and further violantering work become almost difficult. Such kind of blocking left no choice rather being left violantering work and trust. I hope you understand my feelings. ThankKashish pall (talk) 14:37, 19 April 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).

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

Request reason:

two months ago I was blocked due to the creating an article about Harsh Beniwal as sock puppet of Swaroop Kumar solankiya whom made lots of account. Although administrator told me if you are not the same joined another meta list so I joined simple English Wikipedia but I don't have much time so I leave the place but I come to know you already check user done and I wasn't same. I come up only her to pretend Wikipedia for vandilism which I already been done in past time. I actually not create any meta puppet as per your policy . Neither puppet nor sock puppet . Kashish pall (talk) 17:08, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Putting aside the sockpuppetry, this appeal fails to demonstrate the necessary proficiency in written English for contributing to this encyclopedia. MER-C 18:09, 25 June 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 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).

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

Request reason:

I couldn't understand your reason for decline . Creating article not everything on Wikipedia . There are lots of things to be done here . I couldn't understand creating promotional article and connection between banned user is should not be the reason of blocking. And also let me clear while creating promotional article I first myself convert the article in English then start writing over here. I couldn't understand your blocking reason . In Wikipedia terms of use not anywhere written it is required to have good and professional English is required to edit this English Wikipedia. I still not find any good reason of my blocking . But if you think then let me say one thing I only went of simple version because I only have a practice of English written not any other languages. But you still think this reason is true then definitely remain block me forever I will not ask anything. But not in the claim of violetion of making sock puppet. But it is true this is the only language which I know and work easily. Blocked on English Wikipedia means blocked forever.Kashish pall (talk) 08:04, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Our policy on a minimum level of competence, including understanding English. If you cannot contribute in English, then you may be better off contributing in your native language. Also you've claimed that you knowingly created a promotional article, which is either 1) bad english, or 2) a problem you need to deal with head on. Regardless, you block is because of sockpuppetry, which you have not addressed. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 08:49, 26 June 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 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).

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

Request reason:

two months ago I was blocked due to one of the banned user Swarup Kumar Solanki And check user say that I am not same user and definitely Wikipedia terms of use not written anywhere that I need so much good and professional English. But if you say this is the reason then previously I joined simple English Wikipedia which may be proof English will not be part of consern . But I don't think so English is the leading reason of block and you can't block me for the season of sock puppet. Both these reasons don't have any connections together. I think blocking should be deals when voliation is there and have no connection between poor English. I actually didn't interested to work here more and I myself not make any sock puppet account or any meta puppet account. But sorry I will not at all appeal again your unblock requests and I myself don't have to waste my another movement to work here . Previous I was creating tittle Harsh Beniwal which made me blocked due to behavioural reason. Harsh Beniwal is one of the most big Youtuber and always have fans come up here again and again as far as I work I don't find notability reason for the title. Youtubers always beeen famous but not notable enough. Earlier me and SilkTork working on Sandeep Maheshwari title achieve border line notability and he is one of the most famous tittle and have big popularity but borderline notability . This title have eight title delete and people definitely come up again and again creating the title. I asked from SilkTork about the title then he says it's required to have five sources and check through RSN. I couldn't say I have all five sources but I have some good sources which might help the article . But if you say that I couldn't be open then fine Sandeep Maheshwari title always been consern and without any voliation if you think I always been blocked without any violation then remain block me forever and I also not have time and never been come up here as per your so much wishes. Kashish pall (talk) 16:44, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This is far below the level of coherent English we need here. Regardless of whether or not you are a sockpuppet (and multiple people believe you are), it would actively harm the project to allow you to edit here. WP:CIR applies and requires I decline this unblock request. As you have failed numerous block reviews, I'm also revoking your talk page access. Yamla (talk) 11:49, 15 July 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.

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If the block is a CheckUser or Oversight block, was made by the Arbitration Committee or to enforce an arbitration decision (arbitration enforcement), or is unsuitable for public discussion, you should appeal to the Arbitration Committee.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.