User talk:Mnaqvii

Unblock Request

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).

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

Request reason:

Insert I am blocked for a long period i am not doing any voilation and i am not using multiple account i created miltiple accounts but i am using only one account. I'm not a socket pup being blocked for a long time is not good now i want to get unblocked.

Decline reason:

"I am only using one account" -- which account would that be? User:IamMusa? User:MUSA RAZA SYED? User:MusaRazaNaqvi? --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 14:52, 18 March 2015 (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).

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

Request reason:

When i was Blocked i quit wikipedia now i have joined it again with this account User:IamMusa and i was blocked again the user who blocked me he told me that login to your first account and requst for unblock thats why i requsted today otherwise my accounts are inactive and i am not using them i just want to use this account User:IamMusa i have created after 2 months i haven't loged in to any other account since i am blocked except this one for the request. I am getting crazy.! Please i request you to unblock me and parmanently remove all of my accounts except User:IamMusa Please Please..!! I'm being Blocked for a long time thats too much. I didn't knew that if start a new account you will block me again. Because You Say I am Using Multiple Accounts. But That's not truth i came back after a long time and all of my accounts were inactive and i created an account and again started using wikipedia still i didn't logged in to any other account but i was again called socket pup. I request you to kindly unblock me. Mnaqvii (talk) 19:41, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

By your own admission you have operated multiple accounts. PhilKnight (talk) 22:15, 18 March 2015 (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).

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

Request reason:

I did Violation but i left wikipedia. Now i came back after a long time but i'm still blocked now what should i do? Whenever i post a unblock request on my talk page i get the answer that You are Socket pup. Now what should i do to get back on Wikipedia? I'm tired of requesting unblock. My IP is used by many other people. They are also disturbed now should i quit wikipedia forever? I'm upset!

Decline reason:

A block means you, the person, should stop editing until you have addressed the issues that caused the block and the block has been lifted. It doesn't mean you should create a new account to evade your block and continue with exactly the same behaviour. Not logging into accounts you well knew were blocked is not much of a sacrifice. I haven't seen you discuss the problems that caused your original block, and what you'll do to avoid them in the future. Huon (talk) 22:05, 23 March 2015 (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.

Note

According to WP:BLANKING, declined unblock requests may not be removed as long as the block is active. Favonian (talk) 21:47, 23 March 2015 (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).

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

Request reason:

No What Should I Do? No one is going to unblock me. Now what should i do to get unblocked?

Decline reason:

A Standard offer approach could be taken in this case. PhilKnight (talk) 10:47, 25 March 2015 (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.

The standard offer

User:Tokyogirl79 What to do for The standard offer?

Unblock

I didn't see the standard offer post, but here's what's going on currently. A new account with a nearly identical username (minus one letter) was opened only a few months after the last unblock was declined. (Musa Raza) This account edited on the same topics as Mnaqvii and the sockpuppets, enough to where it fits into WP:DUCK. The user has been given more than enough warning that opening new accounts in order to get around the blocks handed out at the SPI is inappropriate and against guidelines. I also note that despite overwhelming evidence to suggest that this is Mnaqvii evading a block, they are claiming that they're not Mnaqvii.

Mnaqvii, this was probably one of the worst things to do when it comes to seeking access to Wikipedia and one that may very well cost you a chance at ever getting unblocked since it shows some pretty bad faith on your part because it shows that you're deliberately trying to hide your sockpuppetry, meaning that you'd learned nothing from the blocking of this account. This makes me doubt if you will seriously follow any of the guidelines on Wikipedia, especially given that the new account had multiple issues with notability and sourcing. Neither of these are things that I'd have blocked you for, however these paired with the disregard for the sockpuppetry guidelines and the clear warnings from other admins that opening new accounts is unacceptable makes me hesitate to offer you any sort of standard offer. I don't know if I can trust you to respect Wikipedia's smaller rules if you can't follow some of the most important ones.

My basic offer here is that you will not open any new accounts at all. If you do, it's extremely likely that this will be detected eventually and your new accounts will be unblocked and at that point your chances of getting unblocked or not getting blocked immediately upon detection are nonexistent. No admin worth their salt would be willing to trust you at that point. After a year has passed you can request an unblock on this account, however you will have to show that:

That you understand why this account was blocked.
That sockpuppetry is unacceptable, regardless of your intent.
That opening up a new account while this one is blocked is seen as sockpuppetry regardless of your intent.
That you understand the notability and reliable source guidelines.
That you will closely adhere to all guidelines on Wikipedia.

If you cannot prove that you understand these guidelines, you're unlikely to get unblocked and at this point my gut reaction is to recommend that you not be unblocked since you refused to admit that the other account was you. That doesn't show accountability and doesn't really foster trust on here. However you are free to seek an unblock in a year's time and if you can convince another admin (I doubt seriously that I will unblock you or recommend that another does this), then they can unblock you. However at this point you'd have to make one heck of an argument for an unblock, far more so than you would've if you'd kept asking for an unblock on this account. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 14:55, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Tokyogirl79: I agree that I used multiple accounts but it was not my intention. I wanted to make helpful contributions. Let me tell you how it started. When I joined Wikipedia in 2014, I didn't read any policy or guideline. I wanted to change my username but I didn't knew how. So I created a new account and I was blocked after a few days. I again ignored to read anything related to Sockpuppetery. I continued creating new accounts and I was getting blocked. But when I started my latest account my intention was to start over and make as much contributions as much I can. And I did that but again I was blocked today. I'm addicted to Wikipedia and I don't how I will pass this block. I request you to unblock me and let me edit Wikipedia with my latest account which you blocked today. Yes I used all these accounts but you know very well that I was not vandalising Wikipedia. I know you can reject my request by saying that "You admitted that you're using multiple accounts". Everytime my unblock request was rejected it urged me to create a new account. But this time I'm not going to it. Now it's up to you, you can unblock me if you believe me. I just want to edit with my latest account which you blocked today. Please try to understand, I always tried to be good on Wikipedia. Now If you kept me blocked it will urge me to create a new account but this time I'm not going to create any other account and I agree with all the points you mentioned above. I will never use or create second account if you unblocked me now and not even you rejected my request. I know you can ublock me. It's up to you. I agree with you and I will never do such things in the future. Kindly unblock me and let me use Wikipedia through User:Musa Raza. That's what I want. I want only that account.
I'm saying it again I'll never Use multiple accounts and I agree with all the points you said above. I have said what I wanted now it's your turn you can unblock me now or you can ask me to wait for a year. It will be great of you trust me.
Thank you--Mnaqvii (talk) 15:35, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The unblock will only happen after a set amount of time, not immediately. There were issues with the way you were editing on the Musa Raza account (minus the whole sockpuppetry thing) with notability and sourcing, however the biggest issue here is that not only did you open a new account after you were specifically and repeatedly told that you should not do this at all but you also lied about it being another account. If you'd been honest to start off then that might have worked in your favor and led to less time having to wait, but the problem here is that you repeatedly lied about it being you and in an attempt to dissuade me you made WP:ADHOMINEM attacks against me as an admin. That doesn't fill me with confidence that you can follow guidelines on here. At the very least I'd say that you should try back in 6 months to a year to seek an unblock, because I don't think that you'll learn anything if we unblock you under any account name. You have to earn back our trust and one of the best ways to do this is to wait 6-12 months before requesting an unblock and to show that you understand the above. This isn't the first time you've been caught with an alternate account and been told to seek an unblock under this account name, so there was no way that you couldn't have known that opening the Musa Raza account was the wrong thing to do. You can post a new unblock request on this page, but given what's happened I imagine that they'll likely tell you the same thing. Some might even suggest no standard offer at this point, so I think that your best bet is to wait and request in 6-12 months time. During this time you might look into creating a wikia in general for your prospective articles and try to make them meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. That way when 6-12 months have passed you can have articles ready and show proof that you understand notability and sourcing guidelines. That won't completely make up for the repeated and persistent sockpuppetry, but it would go a long way towards showing that you can be trusted to edit once more. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 16:51, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Tokyogirl79: I apologise for lying. I just wanted to get unblock. I really can't wait for six months. Please give me a last chance. You can unblock me for few days and see can my behaviour. I don't how can I make you trust me. Please give me a last chance. I'm addicted to Wikipedia and honestly I can't wait too long. You can unblock me you have the right. Please give me a last chance. I admit that I used multiple accounts and that my behaviour is not good. I apologise for all these things. Now what else can I say? Please unblock me for the last time. I will be thankful if you unblock me on User:Musa Raza.--Mnaqvii (talk) 18:31, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Request

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).

Mnaqvii (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'll never go against Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. I have read it again and I promise I'll never show this behaviour again. I'm not too bad editor. I have got some experience as I was autopatrolled, rollbacker and pending changes reviewer. I apologise for the Sockpuppetery. I will become a helpful contributor. I can't wait for six month. Please give me a last and final chance. I request you to unblock me and see my behaviour for few days. If I did anything wrong or against Wikipedia then you can block me for ever. Just requesting a last chance. I have many plans for Wikipedia after my exams and I can't wait for six months. Please trust me once and unblock me. Help me Tokyogirl79. My unblock request is rejected every time and this time request you to give me a last chance. Again I apologise for the Sockpuppetery. I have said enough and I don't know what to say to make you trust me. Please give me a last chance!!!--Mnaqvii (talk) 17:52, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Back in March 2015 you were given the "Standard offer", but you chose not to accept it, so you turned down that opportunity to be unblocked. You can take that offer again now, if you like. You say you can't wait six months, but you are not likely to get an better offer. In fact, in view of your persistent dishonesty, you are damned lucky to get an offer as good as that. Also, for any unblock request to have a reasonable chance of success, you need to address not only the sockpuppetry and lying about it, but also the problems which led to the original block, as was pointed out to you in March 2015, and I suggest you also address the editing problems with your latest sockpuppet. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 20:10, 20 May 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.

@JamesBWatson: I didn't knew that I was offered. I have tried everything to get back here. I said I have read all the rules and regulations again. And you can see my edits after unblocking me. But you're not ready to unblock me. I'm not the user who makes unconstructive edits. I have created many articles and removed vandalism many times and I have apologised also for lying and the Sockpuppetery and still you're not trusting me. I deserve a last chance. Please don't make me wait for too long--Mnaqvii (talk) 08:09, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Request

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).

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

Request reason:

I really don't know that I was offered The Standard Offer. If I knew I would definitely accept it. Since the first block I was trying to get back on Wikipedia. I'm requesting you to give me a LAST CHANCE. I have said many times that I will never do it again. Now I don't know what else should I say. Please unblock me. I can't wait for too long. I promise that I will make good contributions. And if you don't want to block me at least unblock my IP so I can make some contributions. I promise that I will not create a new account I have now left all these things. And if possible please undelete the articles I've created. I have tried many times and I'm asking to give me a last chance but nobody is even thinking of trusting me. I swear that I don't know I was offered Standard Offer. I have admitted that I used multiple accounts and I have read all the rules and regulations of Wikipedia again. I'm ready to start over. I will start making helpful contributions if you give a last chance. Please give me one and only and last chance. Just ONE TIME!.--Mnaqvii (talk) 8:17 am, 21 May 2016, last Saturday (2 days ago) (UTC+2)

Decline reason:

You keep saying that you can't wait for 6-12 months, and that you are "addicted" to Wikipedia. You also keep implying that you will create new account or edit anonymously if we do not unblock you. That kind of behavior does not help you winning back our trust. You keep apologizing, and saying that you now know the rules, and that you will edit constructively if unblocked. And you expect that's enough to win back the trust. Apologizing and promising to change is good, but apologizing and promising after lying and deceiving us for a year is not enough to win back our trust. You have to show us that you are able to follow the rules, and the only possible way to do it is to wait at least six months without any edits. We don't really need people who are "addicted" and who will do anything just to be able to edit Wikipedia. We need people who are calm and who want to build an encyclopedia. The only way to show us that you are one of those is to take the standard offer and wait for at least six months. I also do not believe that you didn't know about the standard offer, because the offer has been here on this very page for more than a year. As about your question regarding IP editing, the answer is: no. Blocks are issued to people, so you are blocked as a person. You are not allowed to edit using any account, nor any IP. Now, trust me, the only way to win back the trust is to take the standard offer. You are lucky to even get that kind of offer. Vanjagenije (talk) 13:54, 23 May 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.

A block of this nature means that you will not be able to edit under any other account, nor will you be permitted to make any edits under an IP address. It is extremely unlikely that you will be unblocked before the 6-12 month waiting period, enough to where I would recommend no further unblock requests until that point. If you do end up making any other accounts to circumvent this block or you try to edit under an IP then that standard offer is gone and your chances of ever getting an unblock or being otherwise permitted to edit on Wikipedia will be nonexistent. The standard offer being given to you now is your last chance and you have to prove yourself to us. You tried requesting an unblock and it was denied by an uninvolved admin. At this point it's extremely unlikely that another admin will unblock you and at this point repeatedly requesting unblocks will very likely end with you getting the talk page rights here rescinded. Please, the best thing for you to do here is to wait and request an unblock in 6-12 months time. This isn't meant to be rude, but if you lack the self control to wait that long then that does not give off the impression that you can be trusted on Wikipedia in general. You repeatedly violated rules on Wikipedia, lied about breaking those rules, and attacked my integrity as an admin, yet you're asking us to ignore all of that and immediately unblock you. That's extremely unlikely to happen. If the next declining admin wants to restrict talk page access then I have no problem with that. You can request an unblock in 6-12 months time through the e-mail system. Do not and I repeat do not open any new accounts to try to get around this. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:14, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Tokyogirl79: Okay I will not make any further requests. And you're again saying that You broke the rules. Now how many times I have to apologise? I sadi I'll never do it again. And I'm not an Idiot that I will now create another account. Okay you don't trust me so don't unblock me. But please tell me how will I get unblocked after six months? Which of my accounts will be activated? And what will happen with other accounts? I have told you before that I want only User:Musa Raza. Please tell me that can I get it back? I don't want to use this or any other account except User:Musa Raza when I'm unblocked. I request you to give me that account back after six months. You never accepted any kind of my requests I apologised many times and still you're talking about my behaviour. Now please don't reject this request. I know you don't want me to get back here as I have tried everything and I have told you that I have many plans for new stuff but still I have to wait for six months even though I apologised many times and asked you to give me a last chance. Now please don't revoke talk page access. One more thing User:Xoloa500s is not my account or I haven't used or created it. I'm not lying it is not related to me. I'm not saying it after just seeing investigation page. I'm telling the truth that account doesn't belong to me.

Thank you.--Mnaqvii (talk) 07:58, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Last time

@Tokyogirl79: I'm pinging you for the last time. I joined Wikipedia in 2014 through User:Mnaqvii and at that time I knew nothing about Wikipedia. After sometime I wanted to change my username. I looked for a tool in settings just like Facebook and Twitter that could help me in changing my username but I found nothing so I created a new account probably User:SMusaRaza. I created the article Haji Springer which was deleted. I repeatedly created that article with poor sources and it was deleted at last I created it again and added some good sources (which were actually unreliable sources) and created it again and you deleted it then I messaged you that why you deleted the article from the first account and blanked yo user page with my other account. Hence I was caught using multiple accounts and was blocked. Again I read nothing and after sometime I created a new account which was also caught and I was blocked. But then I read few guidelines of Wikipedia and I wanted to make Pakistan related articles better. I didn't bother to post an unblock request and created a new account and began to upload and add images to Pakistan related articles. Almost all of the images I uploaded were copyright violations. As usual I was blocked again. This happened few times again. But then I read guidelines for creating new articles. I searched for a notable people who were not on Wikipedia I and decided to create new articles. But all I need was an account. So I created a new account User:Da Wikipedian (which was later moved to User:Musa Raza as per my request) and began editing again but this time I actually read many things about editing and I edited totally in a different way and made good contributions. I created many missing articles and was also appreciated for my contributions. Soon I became autopatrolled user. I was also blocked once for edit warring. I actually had good faith because I was reverting edits of a experienced editor and I thought he was vandalising. This happened because I had ignored reading about Edit warring. After that blockage I tried to become better user. I edited for year using the account Musa Raza. And now I'm blocked again.
In the beginning I was not a good editor and I also vandalised Wikipedia but after that I changed my mind and decided to become a contributor. After the first two accounts I never used two accounts at the same time and while using my latest account, I never logged in to any other account. I assume good faith. I want make Wikipedia better. I know because of my behaviour trusting me is a hard job but I assure you that I will never use or create any other account if you allow me to edit Wikipedia through User:Musa Raza (or even if you don't allow). Every time I was blocked I lied about the Sockpuppetery and I have apologised many times for that. I will correct the mistakes I made in the past. I agree with the points which I have to agree in order to get back (except the WAIT). I also assure you that I will edit Wikipedia according to the rules and regulations and I will become better than I was on User:Musa Raza. Waiting for six months is very hard for me. I request you to discuss this with other admins on the noticeboard and make a decision for my unblock. This is the last time I'm requesting you. I again admit that I used multiple accounts I lied every time I was blocked and I also said that you're not obeying the rules. I did everything wrong and I apologise for it. I hope you will understand me. Now in this message I have lied nothing so I think I deserve a last chance. Please don't ignore this message and do discuss it with other admins. I have now told you everything. Now I think you should trust me and if not please reduce the time from six months. I'm saying it for the third time in this message that:

I used multiple accounts.
I went against the rules/policies/guidelines.
I lied about using multiple accounts and also said that you're wrong.
I apologise for my behaviour.
I will not go against the rules in the future.

And I also agree with the requirements of The Standard Offer except the wait of six months. If you're still not going to trust me. I have an advice. Unblock me and see my contributions and If I went against the rules then block me immediately. Trusting me is hard but I'm saying that you can review my every contribution. So I will not able to make any unconstructive/disruptive edit or vandalism (I don't remember when I did vandalism) which is the reason I'm not getting unblock earlier. This is really the last time I'm requesting you (I think I have said you before that I'm requesting for the last time Now this is really last time). Please do discuss it with other admins. I will not ping you in the future but please don't forget to reply me. Thank you, I appreciate your work here and I just followed you on Twitter.--Mnaqvii (talk) 19:09, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that you're passionate, but I'm just not going to unblock you before six months have elapsed. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 19:30, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tokyogirl79, You're doing this because you don't trust me? And please tell me can I make changes through IP or it is against The Standard Offer? And also tell me about which account wil be given to me when I'm unblocked after six months and what will happen with the other accounts.--Mnaqvii (talk) 19:49, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No, you cannot make any edits at all on Wikipedia, IP or otherwise, until this account is unblocked - and it's preferable that the original account be the one that's unblocked. The other accounts will remain blocked. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 19:57, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, Tokyogirl79 Thanks for replying but you didn't answer one of the questions. I have sent you an email please check it and reply me and I haven't asked you to unblock me there because enough is enough. Anyway good luck.--MUSA • TALK 20:10, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

About the trust? I thought it'd been quite apparent that at this point we just can't trust you, given that you've opened multiple accounts despite being clearly told that it was against policy and that when questioned about one of your latest sockpuppets, you lied repeatedly. That doesn't give me reason to trust that you can follow the general guidelines on here if you cannot follow some of the most important ones. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 20:38, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tokyogirl79 Even after these long message? Okay, It depends on your thinking I can say nothing. Have a lovely day Tokyo's girl and best of luck. And you were probably born in 1979, if so you're more than 18 years older than me. I have to respect my elders so once again have a lovely day and best of luck for your future and good morning also if it's morning in world's largest city. I'm just trying to be good to you because I think you really hate me.

Thank you.--MUSA • TALK 21:41, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't hate you, I just can't trust you given your overall actions. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 21:44, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tokyogirl79 I said you can check and review my every contribution after unlocking me. Now what's wrong in this?--MUSA • TALK 21:47, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Whether or not I can check your edits is not the point. The point here is that you lied repeatedly and violated guidelines on Wikipedia and one of the things I'm asking for as a show of good faith on your part is that you wait 6-12 months to be unblocked. So far you're showing that you're pretty unwilling to do this, which makes me even less inclined to unblock you after that amount of time has elapsed. If you can't even do this small thing then how can we trust you with editing in general? No matter what you write here I'm not going to unblock you and at this point I'm sorely tempted to restrict talk page access because at this point you're doing more to show that you shouldn't be unblocked at all rather than show that you can be trusted, since you seem to be unable to really understand why you were blocked and why we're making you wait before being unblocked. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 22:06, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tokyogirl79 Okay Tokyo's girl as you wish. If I had requested any other person like this he would definitely have accepted it (but not after reading this text). And I'm not speaking against you or saying that you're wrong. Actually you're very hard. I'm logged in through a new IP and I can easily create a new account instead of logging in with this account but I have told you that I'm not going to create a new account. I know you still don't give a damn and you'll never trust me. I read that admins can discuss and unblock a User I asked you to do it but you just replied to that long message by saying No. Maybe not for you but it was rude for me. And I'm pretty sure that you'll ban me from editing my talk page as well. Do you think I said something wrong?--MUSA • TALK 22:25, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You already had one other person respond to your request, JamesBWatson, and they've said no as well, so it's not like it's only me that's against you being immediately unblocked. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 22:53, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tokyogirl79 I asked that user just once but I asked you many times and you just simply said NO. Now if that user comes here I'm sure he will support you and will tell me the same thing that I lied and I disobeyed the rules. Actually you don't give a damn about my messages and apologises and you're scared to unblock me. You can't take risk because If I did something wrong after getting unblock it will be your responsibility and you don't want to take any responsibility. A normal person should agree if he is requested like this but you don't give a damn. All you want me to do is to wait. Six months is not a shorter period. This long wait can urge anyone like me to create a new account. I will not make a new account and I will stay from editing even though I can make edits through a new IP and you can't recognise me. But you'll never trust me even after six months. You can discuss my block with with other admins but you're not doing it. This kind of block/unblock depends on the admins you know it very well. I have said in the previous messages that you can just try my honesty once. The wait is not the main thing, the main thing is the behaviour of the user and I have already said that you can see my behaviour after the unblocking me. You're not agreeing with even my single statement. I'm not writing this to get unblocked I'm just telling you that you're RUDE towards me. I know not for the others but you're rude towards me. I tried to be very nice to you but you're the same. And don't discuss this with other admins (which you don't want to) because everyone will support you and it will be wastage of your're time. Now I'm sure that you will tell me the same thing as you did above or you will not reply me. Enough is enough I'll never ask you to unblock me. One more thing I can see an error in the infobox of the article Lean On and I want to remove it but I can't so please remove it. And I hope you have a great day.

Thank you.--MUSA • TALK 07:40, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

MUSA, can I give you a bit of advice here? I've seen Tokyogirl79 around the place a lot here, and she's a very amiable and friendly person, and she is most definitely not afraid of doing what she thinks is the right thing - so please do not accuse her of not giving a damn and of being too scared to unblock you. I have reviewed this case too (having been watching for a little while), and I concur with both JamesBWatson and Tokyogirl79 that your best chance now lies in a new six-month Standard Offer. I also see a good chance of success with it, providing you do not continue with your accusations that the issue is pre-judged and do not continue making bad faith accusations. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:48, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Boing! said Zebedee: Thanks for the adivce. The main requirement for me is to change my behaviour and to agree with policies and guidelines. SIX MONTHS is not a big deal. Admins have got the right to unblock me even before six months. And I have asked her to unblock me AFTER APOLOGISING, ADMITING MY MISTAKES AND PROMISING TO CHANGE MY BEHAVIOUR plus I did this not just once I apologised many times and I also said that you can judge my contributions after unblocking me. Now after being rejected many times I can just think that she will never trust me and is scared of unblocking me. I have also told that how I became Sockpuppet and it was not my intention. Sockpuppetery is use of multiple accounts for an improper function. I initially used my first two accounts for an improper function (and at that time I didn't even knew how to sign a message) but after getting block for the first time I never used two accounts at the same time. I operated multiple accounts but not two at the same time when I was blocked from one I created another and never logged in to the previous one. On User:Musa Raza I was autopatrolled, pending changes reviewer and rollbacker and I was granted the additional rights because of my experience. Now I don't even deserve a last chance even after having some good experience? As I have said every admin who will come here will speak against me and I don't want anyone to speak against Tokyogirl79. I'm just saying that no one is even thinking of trusting me. Tell me what will I do If I'm unblocked now? You think I will blank the pages or I will add unsourced content? I have said many times that I wil not go against the policies and You can judge my every single edit but still she says WAIT FOR SIX MONTHS. FORGET ABOUT SIX MONTHS!!!! I'm not like the editors who are here to make changes on the articles of their inspirations or the editors who know nothing and just want to create articles on their favourite things. I'm an experienced user I know how to create new articles and I know Wikipedia very well and I will be even better than I was on User:Musa Raza as I have read the policies again. When I started I made unconstructive edits on Bohemia but with User:Musa Raza I removed unsourced material from the article. If she is not trusting me now what will happen after six months? Actually she's not friendly to me. Now what can I say if she doesn't trust me and thinks that I will destroy Wikipedia seconds after getting unblocked. I have apologised her many times for my behaviour now I'm saying it again if I misbehaved with her, Tokyogirl79 I'm Sorry if you think that I misbehaved with you. Boing! said Zebedee good luck to you as well. And I will not ping or mention you unnecessarily but only for replying.--MUSA • TALK 11:48, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be quite blunt - even if I were to ask a dozen admins to come to this page, I don't see them answering any differently than I have. To be honest, the way you've gone between being apologetic to borderline hostile looks extremely, extremely bad since it gives off the impression that you're only saying what you think we want to hear and that you actually haven't learned a thing. You were told to wait. People who have done far less than you have here have been told to wait six months, so this is not something that is arbitrary on my part. If anything, most admins are actually far less likely to give someone the standard offer when they've engaged in sockpuppetry. You're commenting about your edits on the other account, but the problem here is that even though you've said that you've done some things right, you did a lot more things wrong - the most cardinal of which is that you blatantly and even flagrantly disregarded the ban for sockpuppetry. As for getting the various rights, those aren't entirely above and beyond difficult to gain and they're also not difficult to lose. In other words, none of those are rights that will protect you if you've done something wrong and you've done a lot of things wrong on here.

I'll also be very blunt and tell you exactly how you come across right now. Right now you come across like someone who honestly doesn't care about Wikipedia's rules, since you were unwilling to follow the rules about sockpuppetry even from the beginning and you repeatedly lied about your true identity. You were told that you could seek an unblock in six months, but your response is that you're too impatient to wait. Again, people who have done less have received a block and were told that they had to wait six months and the majority of them are perfectly willing to do this because they're aware that it shows that they're serious about conforming to Wikipedia's rules. By repeatedly insisting that you will not wait, you're giving me the impression that you think that you're above the rules and that you think that your edit record makes you too valuable to wait. When you don't get what you want, you turn insulting and insist that any other admin would unblock you and that I'm being "rude" or arbitrary in my block. The problem is, like I said above, most admins would either give you the same offer I have or actually not even offer that at all. I know that a few would have revoked your talk page access at this point and I'm sorely tempted to do just that because right now you're shooting yourself in the foot. Every time you post here insisting that I unblock you because I'm being unfair, that any other admin would unblock you, that I'm being rude, or any other veiled or not so veiled insult towards me, you're actually doing more to show that you shouldn't be trusted with open access to Wikipedia once more. If you cannot work with us on this simple request to get you unblocked then we have to consider how you will edit once you are unblocked and whether or not you will be able to work together with others in other, higher stress situations. If you cannot cooperate with an admin in this type of situation then we have to assume that you will not be able to work with others.

To be fair, I'm going to ping some admins to this discussion since I don't think that you're going to listen to anything I say because you are assuming that I'm the bad guy in all of this and I'm not. There's a large does of WP:ICANTHEARYOU here. (@Euryalus:, @Vanjagenije:, @Ymblanter:, @Dennis Brown:, @Nyttend:, sorry to ping you guys but I don't think that anything I'm saying is going through. To Euryalus, sorry that this is the first time we're really directly interacting but I thought this could benefit from someone that I'm not as familiar with admin-wise.) I could have very, very easily blocked you without chance of ever getting unblocked, but I have extended the standard offer. All you have to do at this point is wait six months and you're telling me that you cannot and will not do that. If you cannot and will not, then that just shows me that even if I did unblock you prior to that, you would just end up getting reblocked because you would continue to have no respect for Wikipedia's guidelines. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 13:13, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My point with everything is that basically you've given us little reason to trust you and your behaviors on here make any positive contributions on your most recent account fairly moot. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 13:15, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

To Mnaqvii, first I will say thank you for coming clean. That will go a long way towards your eventual unblock, and I think it helps to establish a relationship with the community as a whole when you admit past wrong doing. The fact still remains, you did several things that are clearly against policy, precipitated by an unwillingness to read policy first. Some of your actions are more forgivable than others (I think our mechanism for changing your name is rather archaic, for example). To take advantage of the Standard offer, we need 6 months without any socking or activity other than on your talk page. Technically, you should use the original account but I don't want to be pedantic about it, so won't push that. At the appropriate time, your unblock would probably be put up at WP:AN for discussion, given the amount of issues at hand. A checkuser would probably be requested. and input from the community would be solicited (to help verify you haven't been socking). All this isn't required, but it is typical in cases like this. We could debate "why" but the fact remains, this is how it is done and it should simply be accepted at face value. Breezing through the above (I am short on time), I see that Boing and Tokyogirl have given you good advice and are correct in their statements. I'm here to just spell it out a bit. You have caused problems, but most people don't hold a grudge. I would advise listening to them, come back, take a humble attitude, and give yourself every chance you can to get unblocked. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 13:55, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Vanjagenije, Tokyogirl79, and Dennis Brown:

OKAY, I will come back after six months and before that I will not edit Wikipedia.

Now I want to change your point of view regarding me. Before that I have a request, I will do everything required for the Standard Offer but after that when I'm eligible for editing Wikipedia, I just want you give me the account User:Musa Raza and you know what to do with other accounts.

Now I want to make clear that:

It was not my intention to become a Sockpuppet. I used probably 5/6 accounts but I didn't used them at the same time or for vandalism. You can see the date and time of the last edit made by this account (before getting blocked through the latest account) and the first edit made on User:Musa Raza. You can confirm this through all accounts that I didn't used them on same time.
It was unclear to me what is the Standard Offer and I asked Tokyo's girl without pinging her so I got no answer and I didn't knew what to do so I created a new account. As I have told you above, I didn't logged in back here again.
What you think is that I'll use multiple accounts in future as well which is absolutely wrong. You can see that, In every unblock request on this page, I have said that I'm here to make some good changes not to do vandalism but nobody understood what I was trying to say. I was just saying that yes I have used multiple accounts but not for vandalism please let me edit Wikipedia. Every time I got the answer that you used multiple accounts and you'll remain blocked forever. At that time I was not experienced so I thought that I'll never get unblocked because of using multiple accounts and the best way to get back here is to create a new account and stay different.
Now the other Sockpuppets on Wikipedia have used multiple accounts to trick Wikipedia and for vandalism but I haven't been like that. If I was really a Sockpuppet I would have been using another account after User:Musa Raza. And I thought you will understand this and you will reduce the time from six months or you'll allow me to edit from an IP. For you, anyone who broke the rules like this should be banned but I have a story why I became Sockpuppet.
And at last, as you haven't allowed me to edit through IP, I want to make you sure that the few edits made through one IP I'm using are not made by me. I don't know whether you have a tool to recognise this or not.

I just wanted to tell you that I'm not the user who used multiple accounts for improper functions. And I haven't wrote this to get unblocked earlier. I have agreed that I have to come after six months in order to get your trust and I will do so.

But please agree to give me the account I want. That's all I want.

Thank you.--MUSA • TALK 16:52, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Tokyogirl79: Can you please undelete the article Madaari which is about a notable upcoming film? And if possible please fix the error on File:Sanam Teri Kasam 2016.jpeg.--MUSA • TALK 06:42, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I can do that. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:29, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Olivia, Tokyogirl79.--MUSA • TALK 09:00, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted articles

@Tokyogirl79: Hello!
I was hesitating to ping you. I'm not here to waste your time I just want to say that whenever you're free, please take a look at these deleted articles and undelete which you think is notable and should be on Wikipedia.

Many of the articles were notable but were not updated and completely referenced. You can confirm the notability by searching for them in Google News. You can also confirm that the shooting of these upcoming films has been started. I know it will take your time but It will be great if you review them.
Thank you.--MUSA • TALK 08:05, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kindly reply me Tokyogirl79. I don't want to ping you again and again. Please remove vandalism from Shahzeb Khanzada as well. I'm waiting for your response.--MUSA • TALK 05:30, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Tokyogirl79: Can you please take some time to reply me? I have sent you a new email as well.--MUSA • TALK 16:27, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This will take me some time since I will have to check each one in-depth and I also have finals right now. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 20:01, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It also looks like your talk page access has been revoked. I'm going to put these off for the time being, possibly until you are unblocked. To be honest, I was concerned that you were essentially trying to get your editing done through me, which while not automatically a problem, it looks like this could be seen as a way to circumvent that ruling. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 20:05, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Email

@Dennis Brown: Please see and reply me to the email I just sent you.--MUSA • TALK 19:56, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

June 2016

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.

Vanjagenije (talk) 18:42, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note to unblocking admins

I only recently checked my e-mail, as I tend to ignore it unless I get a message specifically asking me to check it.

Since I revoked talk page access this user has sent me two e-mails asking for me to unblock them. They were specifically and repeatedly told that they should check back in six months and that after that point in time they should give a good explanation about their sockpuppetry and editing habits. The first was sent a day after talk page access was revoked, the second was sent on June 2.

In the first email they claimed that they didn't understand why they were blocked - despite several attempts by myself and others to explain why. (Sockpuppetry, problems with editing, etc.) When this email didn't end with his desired result he sent me a second email that was nastier in tone. They called me an outright liar several times and tried to make the same arguments that they did here, only slightly more forceful. It wasn't the nastiest email I've ever received by a long shot, but I consider repeated accusations of lying to be nasty.

Throughout both emails (and this talk page) there was a very common reoccuring theme about them being a wronged party, that they were a great editor, and that they should be unblocked right away. They had to be continually prodded and led into admitting any wrongdoing and the emails have shown that without this prodding they reverted back to the idea that they have done nothing wrong. That they also chose to insult me by repeatedly calling me a liar is just sort of icing on the "should never be unblocked" cake.

I recommend against unblocking this user, as there's a continued refusal to understand the reasons for their block - and there were many. The way that they continually tried to shift the blame on to other people or to various excuses just gives off the impression that any unblocking will lead to more issues and a reblock. They seem to be deliberately refusing to understand what they did wrong or why it would violate guidelines - and when they don't get what they want, they start using insulting language. If they're not able to understand guidelines and they aren't even willing to wait six months before launching a new "unblock me" campaign, then I don't think that we can trust them with editing Wikipedia. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:29, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm adding this from the userpage for Musa Rasa, since this is the original account and I want to make sure that any unblocking admin sees this. This user has sent me another e-mail. This one was slightly nicer in tone but still contained some semi-veiled insults towards me, such as accusing me of "bashing" him on his talk page and requesting a page restoration and writing "But I'm pretty sure you'll never do it." It's not the same as being called a liar at least twice in one email but it's still a clear show of him assuming bad faith on my part, even after several other editors came on to my page and said the exact same things I did.

Like I posted on the other page and reposted here, I do not recommend unblocking him in six months time. Despite repeated attempts to get him to show an understanding of the reasons for his block and to admit wrongdoing, he seems to very quickly revert to the idea that he essentially did nothing wrong without someone prodding him. For me, this shows that he was only saying what he thought we wanted to here and I doubt very seriously that this mindset will change in six months time. That he contacted me via e-mail after he had his talk page revoked (and was sent a very, very clear message that six months was set in stone as a minimum) shows a fairly clear disregard for the rules.

I think that if he was unblocked it'd only end in an eventual (or maybe even an immediate) reblock since his emails show that he doesn't and won't understand the reasons for his block. We shouldn't have to ride someone this much to get them to understand something and the user especially shouldn't immediately revert to his prior way of thinking when that supervision is removed. I think that the only way he'd be able to responsibly edit is if someone constantly monitored him and I don't think that this level of supervision is really possible given how quickly he reverted back since this seems to be a deliberate disregard for the rules laboriously laid out for him by several editors. If anyone wanted to unblock him that's on them, but I heavily recommend against any unblock. I just don't think that he's willing or able to follow guidelines, if he reverted on the very basics this quickly and still continues to insult me (albeit in a lesser format, but it's still there) in a follow up email.

He did ask me to remove the archival tag on his other page, so I will do that. As far as the film Zindagi Kitni Haseen Hai goes, I won't be able to do that without good sourcing and I'm a bit loathe to do that for him since I don't want him to think that he can edit via other editors - that's still considered by many to be a block evasion. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:42, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

He's asking for another block exemption. While he's writing a list of what he did and says he acknowledges that he did it, his tone gives off the impression that he is just telling us what he wants to hear - especially given that he believes that any unblock or decline of an unblock request would be unjust unless it came from an ANI thread per his response to Huon. Mnaqvii, I will be very honest in that your chances of getting unblocked at ANI would be very slim because of how you've conducted yourself in the past. Not only did you do the things above, you also tried to edit via me - something that others considered to be sockpuppetry. Waiting six months is never a guarantee of an unblock and I'll be honest in that you would have to show a completely different demeanor to warrant an unblock. Your attitude at the other page comes across as a bit hostile and I have to assume that if you are unblocked then you will likely end up having a similar attitude as you did in your interactions with myself and others previously. Getting unblocked isn't only about admitting what you did wrong. You need to convince us that not only will you not do these actions again but that you will also interact well with others. I'm sorry, but given your recent actions towards the decline of the unblock request I have to say that I don't think that you should ever be unblocked. I just don't think that you will follow guidelines and have the right attitude. I just get the impression that if unblocked you will almost certainly get into an argument because you don't want to collaborate and if confronted with something you did wrong, you will argue against all of it instead of trying to see where others are coming from. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 17:18, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]