User talk:Saatvik.Jacob Material Scientist

June 2016

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Adoor has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Adoor was

Recent edits to Pandalam

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Pandalam, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Materialscientist (talk) 10:19, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Adoor, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Konni. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:21, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock Reason

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).

Saatvik.Jacob Material Scientist (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hello I am sorry for Disruptive Editing, I won't do it again promise !, now please please unblock me !

Decline reason:

Less than ten minutes ago, you tried to avoid your block by getting your other account, Saatvik.Jacob (talk · contribs), unblocked. It's clear you don't yet understand WP:SOCK. Yamla (talk) 15:21, 6 October 2016 (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.

Saatvik.Jacob Material Scientist (talk) 15:18, 6 October 2016 (UTC) Saatvik.Jacob Material Scientist (talk) 15:18, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why ?

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).

Saatvik.Jacob Material Scientist (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

original unblock reason

Decline reason:

Your request to be allowed to edit with other accounts (below) shows that you have no understanding of Wikipedia's policies on the use of multiple accounts and on block evasion. You, the person, are currently prohibited from editing and you, the person, will not be permitted to edit unless you adequately address the reason for it. Please read WP:SOCK and do not make another unblock request until you fully understand it. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:44, 6 October 2016 (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.

At least allow me to edit with other accounts

Saatvik.Jacob Material Scientist (talk) 15:25, 6 October 2016 (UTC) Saatvik.Jacob Material Scientist (talk) 15:25, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock Reason

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).

Saatvik.Jacob Material Scientist (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hi I have read WP:SOCK policy and I understood it I won't create another sock account again and will obey WP rules, so I sorry for what I have done, please unblock my account and let me edit again.Saatvik.Jacob Material Scientist (talk) 05:33, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

As per below. Talk page access revoked. Apply at WP:UTRS no sooner than six months from now, as per WP:Standard offer. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:39, 10 December 2016 (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.

Thanks, that's progress. You will also need to address the disruptive editing in greater ddetail. When you're unblocked, what will you be doing differently? Huon (talk) 12:14, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not to forget, your latest sock -- User:KING OF KINGS was unearthed just a couple of hours ago. —SpacemanSpiff 12:22, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Saatvik.Jacob Material Scientist (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #18429 was submitted on Jun 04, 2017 08:49:41. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 08:49, 4 June 2017 (UTC) [reply]

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

Saatvik.Jacob Material Scientist (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #20010 was submitted on Dec 10, 2017 06:55:38. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 06:55, 10 December 2017 (UTC) [reply]

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

Saatvik.Jacob Material Scientist (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #21443 was submitted on May 07, 2018 03:46:30. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 03:46, 7 May 2018 (UTC) [reply]

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

Saatvik.Jacob Material Scientist (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #21447 was submitted on May 07, 2018 07:04:40. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 07:04, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock Request (May 2018)

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).

Saatvik.Jacob Material Scientist (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hello I am Saatvik Jacob from Adoor town , I would like to really apologise for what I did , I have now read all policies and I would never do any sock puppetry (creating more than 1 account ) or disruptive editing or vandalism or any Wikipedia rules and regulations violations , instead I would edit articles nicely to the perfection and be a good editor in Wikipedia and yearn to be an administrator. Please try to understand me and if I am unblocked I would help other editors and edit articles related to Kerala municipalities and other technical articles , I assure you I would not do the bad things I did in the past I will be the best . So please try to understand me and help me. So please try to unlock me. Forget the past and see the future and see me as a good editor. The blocking admin did his duties in the right way there is no fault with them. I would make good article contributions to Wikipedia. I was talking to you guys in the talk page in that way back in 2016 because I was using my mobile for editing PS: I had got a 6 month basic policy from an Admin on Jun 2017 after filing a UTRS appeal, I followed the policy till DEC 2017 by not doing any edits and still I didn't get unblocked , till now I haven't made any edits till now , other than in my talk page, please try to help me.

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only. This unblock request has been open for more than two weeks but has not proven sufficiently convincing for any reviewing administrator to take action. You are welcome to request a new block review if you substantially reword your request. Yamla (talk) 14:25, 31 May 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.

Yamla Can you please explain how. .....??? I read those set of rules and wrote this now can you give me some tips on It.

Saatvik.Jacob Material Scientist (talk) 15:40, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not really, no. WP:GAB is what you should read. But the problem is, you have by my count 23 separate sockpuppet accounts, the most recent of which appears to have been used this month. If true, you are practically speaking, banned from Wikipedia as per WP:CBAN (specifically, WP:3X). The barrier to get unbanned is very high, as you need to convince the community you won't repeat your previous bad behaviour (even though you've explicitly demonstrated you will). --Yamla (talk) 15:44, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yamla , No ma'am I haven't not operated any accounts this full year or from July 2017 after filling UTRS application and haven't even edited Wikipedia till now, thank you for your help and I created accounts because I was not fully aware of the rules in 2016, please give me your full support ma'am , I won't do it again I will put another request. I promise to be good.

Saatvik.Jacob Material Scientist (talk) 15:02, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No. You clearly knew about WP:SOCK and decided to deliberately and maliciously violate it. That's it, there's nothing more I can do for you. --Yamla (talk) 00:32, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ma'am I did the WP:SOCK till May 2017 and ma'am please don't tell like that you must help me, I evaded it but I promised I woundnt do it and as I told you I stopped editing WP since July 2017 after submitting a UTRS appeal after an editor told me and ma'am please don't discourage me.

Saatvik.Jacob Material Scientist (talk) 06:37, 9 June 2018 (UTC) [reply]

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

Saatvik.Jacob Material Scientist (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #23970 was submitted on Feb 16, 2019 15:22:20. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 15:22, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock Request (February 2019)

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).

Saatvik.Jacob Material Scientist (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have seriously offended Wikipedia rules in 2016 and 2017 respectively, I would like to apologize as I am now aware of the rules and want to become a serious editor and not do sockpuppetry again, I know I have created 22 socks but I won't repeat that kind of vandalism again and I would yearn to be the best, I had received a 6 months standard offer and I followed it and have not edited or made a sock account till now. Now if you would like ,could you please unblock me as I would like to edit Wikipedia again and I know all the evidence is against me but I would like to ask for an apology and never to do the same mistake I committed again, please don't think of the past and please look forward to unblock me , I really want to have a comeback to WP. So please try to unblock and never again will I vandalise Wikipedia .Also I have learnt all the rules and the was to edit and am looking forward to edit some pages after the unblocking happens, I won't commit the sockpuppetry or vandalism I did . Thanking you Saatvik.Jacob Material Scientist (talk) 08:50, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

CU evidence of recent socking. GoldenRing (talk) 09:18, 19 March 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.

Checkuser needed Could a friendly CU please check this user's claim that they have avoided socking for six months? GoldenRing (talk) 17:03, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@GoldenRing: First, all CUs are friendly.

Second, a CU can only see data for the last three months. Disclaimers now aside, the user has been editing logged out as recently as last month. To the extent this user should ever be unblocked, the SO clock starts again from now, but I strongly believe that six months from now is too soon given the repeated duplicity.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:33, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbb23: Many thanks. GoldenRing (talk) 09:17, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]