User talk:Citylightson

Citylightson, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Thank you so much for inviting me to tea house

Hi Citylightson! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like 78.26 (talk).

78.26 Hi i am very new and happy to being introduced to you by teahouse i want to have more contributions but not very much known to wikipedia format please go through my use and see how i am going. lots of love & respect --Citylightson (talk) 16:57, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:05, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Not notable

Your Draft:Faizan Raiees Tak is about a person who does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability. If submitted, it will be declined. David notMD (talk) 03:06, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

David notMD thank you so much for being kind in informing me about the draft i had created.

Could you please tell me how shall i delete it if it doesnt meet wikipedia criteria. Greatful — Preceding unsigned comment added by talk:Citylightson (talk • contribs)

You can request it be deleted by placing {{db-author}} at the top of your draft. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:35, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Also, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:37, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

thank you so much for sharing your expertise. --Citylightson (talk) 22:10, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

March 2019

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Rahul Bhat, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. See MOS:SURNAME. Drm310 🍁 (talk) 19:16, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Rani Hazarika has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Rani Hazarika. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 15:09, 13 March 2019 (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).

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

Request reason:

Could anyone please explain why my draft has been deleted and why you blocked my account? Citylightson (talk) 20:19, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

See WP:SOCK. MER-C 20:28, 13 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.

Would you please perform a checkuser?Citylightson (talk) 20:32, 13 March 2019 (UTC) could you please perform CheckUser Intervention. i have gone through the matter but i am not at all aware who is this user:farooqahmedbhat i request administrators action why is someone unnecessarily tried to traumatise me by illagimate reason. looking forward for a kind reply. --Citylightson (talk) 06:27, 14 March 2019 (UTC) {{Admin help}} Citylightson (talk) 09:19, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

{{Admin help}} for me Wikipedia is platform for everyone to explore knowledge and contribute so that our new generations can avail & collect authentic information contributed by elders to help new & future generations. User talk:GSS has violated wikipedia norms by blocking & discouraging new users like User:Jenifer Intiha User talk:German Bird & many more who don't seem to be aware about the basic tools of wikipedia & so far have not requested for unblock. discouraging new editors by blocking and blaming them of sockpupetry without any legitimate reasons is violation and personal attack to someones self esteem.

i have gone through all the issues raised by User talk:GSS with userUser talk:farooqahmedbhat who actually seem to have contributed for many inspring articles & behaviour of user talk:GSS could have been polite as well as softer since he is being pretending responsible editor of wikipedia. Dear {{admins}} its my request that User talk:GSS should be given lesson for doing so and if he continues to scare new users then in future i can predict none of the new editors will ever dare to waste their time to contribute since if GSS can so easily delete their hardwork. Rest if wikipedia prove me guilty i am ready to be blocked and banned.

i want to clarify that i am not at all known to these users and really feeling traumatised by being labelled as sockpupetry of User talk:Farooq Ahmed Bhat by such activity User talk:GSS has attacked my self esteem and ruined my user image. if User talk:GSS has any personal issue with farooq ahmed bhat he is free to fight against him out of wikipedia platform looking for justics. {{help arbitration}} {{help admin}} --Citylightson (talk) 21:39, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

^{[clarification needed]} Dear editor User:Farooqahmedbhat its my humble request please share your issue here so that i can also look into matter what exactly has happend i am really unable to figure out why has many users aleged you of sockpupetry why dont you speak out and get me out of trouble. why am i been targeted on your name? please answer?

This request for help from administrators has been answered. If you need more help or have additional questions, please reapply the {{admin help}} template, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page.

Citylightson (talk) 07:36, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

i have written many articles please unblock me why are not you guys investigating my user name , please delete the articles you dont feel deserving, but unblock my account please.

humble request Citylightson (talk) 21:34, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings. I have forwarded your request to the CheckUser team, who will review your case at the earliest convinience. They may respond here directly, but I will let you know if they reply to me via email instead. Regards, ~Swarm~ {talk} 05:35, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm finding the behavioral evidence fairly compelling without using CU. It may be a case of WP:MEAT as opposed to a sock operated by the same person, but as far as Wikipedia is concerned it's the same thing. I'd like the user to explain why they chose these particualr items at this particular time, and if maybe they were encouraged to do so by something off-wiki? Beeblebrox (talk) 21:16, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

~Swarm~ thank you s o much for atleast taking out some time to look into my matter. i am really thankful to your kindness and generous. please get me unblocked so that i can go ahead. i could have managed to open another account, but i can not decieve my self esteem. the reason why i am fighting for my unblock is because i have nerver used this account for anything which could any way let down wikipedia norms. Citylightson (talk) 22:41, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please respond to Beeblebrox. ~Swarm~ {talk} 22:44, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

sure ~Swarm~ will surely respond to user:beeblebrox but i am unable to understand whats CU? Will still respond.

Beeblebrox is the CheckUser (CU) you requested, but he thinks the evidence is overwhelming, and he does not believe you. So, you need respond to him explaining why your edits would so strongly appear to be obvious sockpuppetry. ~Swarm~ {talk} 23:13, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User:beeblebrox THANKS for reaching out to a new user like me. i am a small town girl and have started everything in life by my own. would i have been that smart it would have not taken me 7 years to see mumbai. i am self made girl from a conflict zone. i have huge vale for honest and genuine people because i have seen blood shed all around me and that taught me life is so small and i believe in karma. exapanding my description was a basic need to potray that i am not known to any of users with this name user:Farooq ahmed bhat. i had gone to a party and i heard a song called "MAENZI RAATH" in kashmiri which took me back to my child hood when we had to shift from kashmir. in the night i searched for the song and i came to know this song is sung by bollywood singer RANI HAZARIKA and searched her on google and got to see her many songs but unfortunately she was not in wikipeda and i started making her page on wikipedia. while listening her this song i got to know this music label Ar music studios where i felt so joyous by listening to other songs. but co-incident which i believe is that when someone gets popular initially in some state everyone starts following thats the only reason that 3-4 people which i guess have started making the pages on same time which created trouble. this is what labbeled me sock puppet of FAROOQ AHMED BHAT and i have requested him too through my talk page to answer but he didnt answer.

now you and ~Swarm~ are the hope to sort my matter out rest if you cant help me no worries i will accept your decision as final and keep my self away from here. sorry you both will have to read my emotions but i am like this ...i wish you both a happy life and good luck with wikipedia. Citylightson (talk) 23:51, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear ~Swarm~ didn't recieve any response from User:Beeblebrox yet. i think UC Does not want to aknowledge my reply.. Citylightson (talk)

Actually there has been some discussion on the functionaries mailing list and basically they agree with what I've said above, that the evidence strongly suggest you are not being entirely honest. Again I would advise you to read WP:MEAT and after that the guide to appealing blocks, and maybe try again to request unblock afterward. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:42, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Beeblebrox I have gone through WP:MEAT and WP:GAB policies and i am feeling i live in the IP coverage area where from somone has made breach of wikipedia & vandalisied wikipedia Articles. i assume full faith in wikipedia administration who when ever investigate my block will realise that i have been blocked unnecessarily. i had not joined this platform to spread dis-honesty but was determined to contribute everything interesting and constructive. now if you dont trust me that wll be fully your decision and i will accept every decision coming from you. if their is anyway else through which i can prove my honesty? i am ready. rest its violation of wikipedia block policy to block an innocent with baseless reasons. Citylightson (talk) 07:12, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As I said above, once you've read those pages you should file a new unblock request. A previously uninvolved administrator can review it. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:43, 26 March 2019 (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).

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

Request reason:

I have been writing to Very Humble & so kind admin ~Swarm~ who introduced me to Beeblebrox for my unblock request but reasons given by Beeblebrox were very true that how shall they trust me and my honesty as per his discussion with his associate wikipedia functionaries.i am very thankful to both of them for reaching out to me since i was feeling like left all alone in the unidentifed island then all of a sudden reply to my request was a feeling like someone coming to pick me up as a new hope. i have requested that i have no clue of why i am being blocked un-necessarily after requesting twice to Beeblebrox to unblock me he again advised me to put an unblock request. i tried my best to keep my request as honest as it is. now i want reviewers to review my unblock request as earlier as they can so that i could also continue with some constructive and helpful articles. if still wikipedia functionaries cant help me out but at least they can tell me how to investigate an individual if he seems not at all a trust worthy..rest its yours choice and no matter whether i will be able to use and contribute for wikipedia in future or not. but, i shall conclude by saying that i would want to thank ~Swarm~ despite his high stature as admin he was so miscible and open for suggestions so was followed by beeblibrox. Citylightson (talk) 23:31, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I'm sorry, but I cannot unblock you at this time as this is a sockpuppetry and/or checkuser block. Check users have access to technical and personally identifying information they may not disclose openly on Wikipedia. Please read and heed the relevant sections of the WP:GAB. Generally, behavioral issues are also a factor. There are millions of Wikipedia articles, and we are dubious of coincidences when combined with technical findings. If this is not your original account, you will need to appeal at your original account. You will need to deal with all the issues associated with all of your accounts. DlohCier ekim 00:18, 27 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.

discussion

@Beeblebrox: I declined the unblock, but please look this over in case I was in error. DlohCier ekim 00:25, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Dlohcierekim: Just for clarity, there is no technical evidence as I have not used checkuser here. I find the SPI and the original block credible enough without it. ≤Beeblebrox (talk) 02:17, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Also the block was imposed by Reaper Eternal based on behavior. RE is not a CU; former doesn't count in this context.

--Bbb23 (talk) 20:17, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DEAR Beeblebrox Shall i consider that i will never be unblocked against these baseless allegations. i am really upset of being blocked by accusing me as sockpeppet, its so disrespecting. please look into matter its been so long now . Citylightson (talk) 20:10, 31 March 2019 (UTC) user:farooqahmadbhat please refrain from such activities i am unnecessarily being dragged. Citylightson (talk)[reply]

@Dlohcierekim: Beeblebrox ~Swarm~ thanks for your support and time here i am saying good bye to wikipedia. i was unneccessarily dragged into this term "SOCKPUPPET" Citylightson (talk) 15:29, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]