User talk:PankhilSen

Welcome!

Older warnings and/or other comments on this page have been removed, but are still viewable in the page history.

Hello, PankhilSen, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! I dream of horses If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{U|I dream of horses}} to your message (talk to me) (My edits) @ 19:02, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Deepak Jain Tinu for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Deepak Jain Tinu 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/Deepak Jain Tinu 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. GSS (talk|c|em) 04:48, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't delete this page.. PankhilSen (talk) 04:54, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @I dream of horses: please help me to save this page from deletion..

Help

Hello, please help to save this Deepak Jain Tinu page from deletion..@Fylindfotberserk: PankhilSen (talk) 05:07, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please unblock

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).

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

Request reason:

please unblock my account because I want to delete that sockpuppet account, I work on wiki guidelines from now

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Dlohcierekim (talk) 05:50, 29 July 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.

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).

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

Request reason:

The block is no longer necessary because I understand what I have been blocked for, and promise I will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and I will make useful contributions instead.

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 10:45, 29 July 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.

Just for adding your first unblock request you removed the prod from one of your articles using an IP address which is again a violation of WP:SOCK. Also, if you are in some sense being paid to write articles on Wikipedia, you must disclose your paid status. Thank you. GSS (talk|c|em) 08:11, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your concern but atleast provide me the time period in which I get my account unblock automatically. @GSS: PankhilSen (talk) 09:39, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not paid to write any article on Wikipedia, please help me to get out of this block. नमस्कार।। @GSS: PankhilSen (talk) 09:42, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I feel sorry for what I did mistakenly violet the ip addresse rule WP:SOCK on Wikipedia. I don't know the rule of sockpuppet because I'm a new user. So, please accept my apology. And I'm seriously not going to do such mistakes again on Wikipedia. @GSS:

Speedy deletion nomination of User:PankhilSen

A tag has been placed on User:PankhilSen requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

Continuously vandalise the Wiki guidelines and sockpuppet user must be deleted because of two user accounts

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Bjelite (talk) 16:01, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock

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).

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

Request reason:

I am blocked for a period of 4 years now. I made a mistake to create more than one accounts on Wikipedia because I was new and unaware about the policies. All other accounts are also blocked & I assure that I'll never active them in future. By this statement I request the administrator that knowingly or unknowingly I never vandalise the Wiki guideline in future. Please accept my unblock request. Thank you PankhilSen (talk) 11:32, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I concur with Yamla below that it doesn't make sense that you didn't know you shouldn't create multiple accounts to evade a block. Maybe after the first one, but not more than one. 331dot (talk) 08:26, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Checkuser data shows no evidence of recent block evasion. I've already reviewed a prior unblock request so won't review this. I'll note that it is simply not plausible that this user did not know about WP:SOCK and WP:EVADE, at least not after the first sockpuppet account was blocked. They continued to violate these policies at least five subsequent times. --Yamla (talk) 12:26, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]