User talk:Ayoe.pihl

August 2014

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Kartikeya Sharma, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Jevansen (talk) 12:21, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rameshkohli123, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

Anupmehra -Let's talk! 07:13, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rameshkohli123, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

Anupmehra -Let's talk! 07:13, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

This edit and this one were pure vandalism. By using {{delete}} tags, you placed the talk pages into CAT:CSD not the articles. But in any case both of these are well established articles where speedy deletion is utterly inappropriate. You could try proposing deletion at Articles for deletion but would probably get nowhere. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 08:34, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

To nominate an article for deletion at articles for deletion you need to follow the directions at WP:AFDHOWTO. I have deleted the two pages you made because they were completely wrong and reverted your edit to a closed AFD. GB fan 11:22, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

September 2014

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Lavasa. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include, but are not limited to, links to personal websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated (whether as a link in article text, or a citation in an article), and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. Thomas.W ^talk 11:34, 3 September 2014 (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).

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

Request reason:

Why I have been blocked for doing editing on wikipedia. Being a responsible user I am trying my level best to give best to wikipedia then why I have been blocked. Whats the exact reason please tell.

Decline reason:

A combination of behavioural evidence and technical information provided by the checkuser tool indicates that it is likely that you have abused multiple accounts. PhilKnight (talk) 16:28, 3 September 2014 (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.