User talk:Danish.mehraj26

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

Hi Danish.mehraj26! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

-- 11:49, Thursday, March 17, 2016 (UTC)

Mission 1	Mission 2	Mission 3	Mission 4	Mission 5	Mission 6	Mission 7
Say Hello to the World	An Invitation to Earth	Small Changes, Big Impact	The Neutral Point of View	The Veil of Verifiability	The Civility Code	Looking Good Together

Get Help

About The Wikipedia Adventure | Hang out in the Interstellar Lounge

Your autobiography and its speedy deletion

Please do not write or add to an article about yourself, as you apparently did at Danish Mehraj. Creating an autobiography is strongly discouraged – see our guideline on writing autobiographies. If you create such an article, it may be deleted. If what you have done in life is genuinely notable and can be verified according to our policy for articles about living people, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later (see Wikipedians with articles). If you wish to add to an existing article about yourself, please propose the changes on its talk page. Please understand that this is an encyclopedia and not a personal web space or social networking site. If your article has already been deleted, please see: Why was my page deleted?, and if you feel the deletion was an error, please discuss it with the deleting administrator. Thank you.

Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself, as you did with Danish Mehraj. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Contest this speedy deletion, which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the article's talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you.

LjL (talk) 03:43, 11 March 2016 (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/Danish.mehraj26, 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.

Drm310 (talk) 09:59, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

March 2016

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 15:35, 11 March 2016 (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).

Danish.mehraj26 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

please unblock me. I was unaware of such incidents. I assure you, I will never do it again Danish Mehraj 02:10, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Decline reason:

So you are denying that you engaged in sockpuppetry, but go on to pledge not to do it again? You seem to be only interested in creating articles about a person who is not remotely notable, and as such there is no reason to unblock. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 03:26, 12 March 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.

Please I accept the miskate. I extremely aplogize for this. I request you please revoke my block. I assure you this will never happen again. Danish Mehraj 12:25, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Block appeal

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Danish.mehraj26 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I promise, I shall never perform such activities which violate Wikipedia policies and guidelines. I was properly unaware of Wikipedia guidelines. I have taken all the things into consideration before making edits or creating articles on Wikipedia. I will edit those articles which are likely related with physics, computer science and technology. I belong to technology stream so I will contribute up to my level best to those articles which relate to my field. I was a new user on Wikipedia without having proper or complete knowledge about its guidelines, I violated the protocols and that is why I was blocked. I have understood the guidelines properly and I assure you that such mistakes will never happen again.

Accept reason:

This is a WP:ROPE unblock. Any attempt to game the system will result in indefinite block. Vanjagenije (talk) 23:07, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbb23:

Danish Mehraj 11:57, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

You don't get to remove declined unblock requests on active blocks. I've restored the last one, as well as the context. Continuing to remove declined block requests on an active block will result in your loss of the ability to edit your talk page. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 13:28, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In order to be unblocked, please do the following:
1. Explain why you were blocked. Explain what was wrong in your behavior. Show me that you understand the reason of your block.
2. Tell me what kind of edits do you intend to make if unblocked? What kind of articles do you want to create? Do you want to continue writing about yourself? If not, what do you want to write about? Vanjagenije (talk) 12:33, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I was blocked for performing sock puppetry. I understand that I have used multiple accounts abusively for self-promotion. I assure you suck mistakes will never happen again.
I understand that I cannot write about myself again. If I will be unblocked I will intend to edit those articles which are related to my profession and those whom I have knowledge about like physics, computer science, mathematics, artificial intelligence etc.

@Vanjagenije: Danish Mehraj 11:19, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Ponyo: Can you take a look at this case? Bbb23 is the blocking admin, but has been away for a week. This is a checkuser block, so I need permission from one of Checkusers to unblock. Vanjagenije (talk) 00:46, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Vanjagenije: I don't see any socking since the March 11th incident and related SPI.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:27, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Ponyo: May I unblock? Vanjagenije (talk) 21:55, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's your call.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:20, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Energising Bharat Awards (March 24)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Onel5969 was:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

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:Energising Bharat Awards and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:29, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Danish.mehraj26, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:29, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Energising Bharat Awards (April 16)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Tvx1 was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

The comment the reviewer left was:

What remains is currently insufficient to justify an article.

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:Energising Bharat Awards and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

T v x1 00:05, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Energising Bharat Awards (April 23)

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

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the general guideline on notability and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

The comment the reviewer left was:

The newly added reference (http://www.openthemagazine.com/open-avenue/bpcl-energising-bharat-awards-foreward) seems to be written by the company, as it uses the first person. As a result, it does not help show that these awards merit inclusion in Wikipedia. These awards would merit a one-sentence description in the existing Bharat Petroleum article, but not their own article. Thanks,

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:Energising Bharat Awards and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

/wiae /tlk 12:47, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Asian 10,000 Challenge invite

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge and Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like South East Asia, Japan/China or India etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. At some stage we hope to run some contests to benefit Asian content, a destubathon perhaps, aimed at reducing the stub count would be a good place to start, based on the current Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon which has produced near 200 articles in just three days. If you would like to see this happening for Asia, and see potential in this attracting more interest and editors for the country/countries you work on please sign up and being contributing to the challenge! This is a way we can target every country of Asia, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 01:34, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

New deal for page patrollers

Hi Danish.mehraj26,

In order to better control the quality of new pages, keep out the spam, and welcome the genuine newbies, the current system we introduced in 2011 is being updated and improved. The documentation and tutorials have also been revised and given a facelift. Most importantly a new user group New Page Reviewer has been created.

Under the new rule, you may find that you are temporarily unable to mark new pages as reviewed. However, this is nothing to worry about - most current experienced patrollers are being accorded the the new right without the need to apply, and if you have significant previous experience of patrolling new pages, we strongly encourage you to apply for the new right as soon as possible - we need all the help we can get, and we are now providing a dynamic, supportive environment for your work.

Find out more about this exiting new user right now at New Page Reviewers and be sure to read the new tutorial before applying. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:28, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Energising Bharat Awards

Hello, Danish.mehraj26. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "Energising Bharat Awards".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. 1989 (talk) 16:56, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ARBIPA sanctions alert

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Kautilya3 (talk) 20:08, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Danish.mehraj26. You have new messages at Talk:1947 Poonch Rebellion.
Message added 20:33, 19 December 2017 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

-- 🎼Yexstorm2001🎼 (talk) 20:33, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Capitals00

Do that again, and I'll block you. Also, log in when you edit.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:58, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of JKEDI Siege for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article JKEDI Siege 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/JKEDI Siege 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.

DTM (talk) 11:21, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Iqbal Institute of Technology and Management for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Iqbal Institute of Technology and Management 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/Iqbal Institute of Technology and Management 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.

—CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 13:13, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]