User talk:The Abnormal Guy

This is The Abnormal Guy's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

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).

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

Request reason:

Hai can anyone tell me why I am blocked ? What is sockpuppet? Plz help

Decline reason:

You are accused of abusing multiple accounts. See WP:SOCK. PhilKnight (talk) 08:55, 22 February 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.

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).

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

Request reason:

@PhilKnight: I have not abused multiple accounts. This is my only account. Why would I need to create another. Please I don't still understand why I am blocked.

Decline reason:

First, if we unblocked people just because they said they weren't socks we might as well not have a sockpuppetry policy. Second, the evidence at the SPI is very convincing and tight. — Daniel Case (talk) 07:39, 23 February 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.

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).

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

Request reason:

After researching for some time, I found out this. From there I learned why I was blocked. User:Akevsharma told at the investigation that I am a sock of a User:CallistoR7. This user, before me, created the articles Vilayath Buddha and Thankam (film). After he was blocked on 21 January, these articles were deleted. I joined Wikipedia on 27 January. The reason why I created Thankam (film) was because I found out that it had no article on Wikipedia. So I created it. My request is not finished. Since, the unblock request won't work if I add more, I am making another request along with this as a continuation. Please read the next request too. It is hidden so please switch to source edit.

Decline reason:

The unblock request will work with extra information in it, please do not hide info in the source data. RickinBaltimore (talk) 14:48, 1 March 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.

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).

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

Request reason:

This is the continuation. It is hidden. Please switch to source edit.

Decline reason:

Duplicate request RickinBaltimore (talk) 14:46, 1 March 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.

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).

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

Request reason:

After researching for some time, I found out this. From there I learned why I was blocked. User:Akevsharma told at the investigation that I am a sock of a User:CallistoR7. This user, before me, created the articles Vilayath Buddha and Thankam (film). After he was blocked on 21 January, these articles were deleted. I joined Wikipedia on 27 January and created the latter article. The reason why I created Thankam (film) was because I found out that it had no article on Wikipedia. So I created it. As for Vilayath Buddha, while I was going through YouTube, I found this. That was when I even knew a film like that exists. So, I decided to create it. But I didn't create it as an article. I started it as a draft and only added the infobox. It was some days later a user called User:Sreejithk2000 expanded the draft fully and I thanked him on his talk page. This is the conversation (for proof). So I want to ask this: Just because I created an article which was previously deleted (which I didn't know), how would I become a sockpuppet. It was just coincidental. How many other users might have done this too. Aren't they also socks then? Certainly the person who reported me (User: Akevsharma) judged me without going through the situation. This is the only account I have and also if you want proof, let a Checkuser scan me. In conclusion, I want to say that this block is false. So, I request to be unblocked.

Decline reason:

It's really obvious from the history of this account's edits on Thankam (film) and CallistorR7's now-deleted edits on Thankam that they are by the same person. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 06:26, 3 March 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.

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).

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

Request reason:

After researching for some time, I found out this. From there I learned why I was blocked. User:Akevsharma told at the investigation that I am a sock of a User:CallistoR7. This user, before me, created the articles Vilayath Buddha and Thankam (film). After he was blocked on 21 January, these articles were deleted. I joined Wikipedia on 27 January and created the latter article. The reason why I created Thankam (film) was because I found out that it had no article on Wikipedia. So I created it. Before the article was deleted on January 21, I had copied the source code so that I can study how Wikipedia works. So the articles are identical. As for Vilayath Buddha, while I was going through YouTube, I found this. That was when I even knew a film like that exists. So, I decided to create it. But I didn't create it as an article. I started it as a draft and only added the infobox. It was some days later a user called User:Sreejithk2000 expanded the draft fully and I thanked him on his talk page. This is the conversation (for proof). So I want to ask this: Just because I created an article which was previously deleted (which I didn't know), how would I become a sockpuppet. It was just coincidental. How many other users might have done this too. Also, just because I am interested in film topics doesn't mean I am a sock. There are many users in Wikipedia who edit just film related topics. Aren't they also socks then? Certainly the person who reported me (User: Akevsharma) judged me without going through the situation. This is the only account I have and also if you want proof, let a Checkuser scan me. In conclusion, I want to say that this block is false. I am right now working on creating some articles. I am contributing more time to Wikipedia. So, I request to be unblocked.

Decline reason:

This is a checkuser block, so a checkuser has already looked into this. They don't perform innocence checks per WP:CHECKUSER: "On some Wikimedia projects, an editor's IP addresses may be checked upon their request, typically to prove innocence against a sockpuppet allegation. Such checks are not allowed on the English Wikipedia and such requests will not be granted." Just in doing as Jpgordon suggests above I reached the same conclusion. Perhaps this is your only account and this is meat puppetry instead, but this isn't a coincidence unless you are the unluckiest person on this planet. 331dot (talk) 20:42, 4 March 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.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Thankam (film) has been accepted

Thankam (film), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Atlantic306 (talk) 00:27, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Iratta (January 30)

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

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of films). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Iratta and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Akevsharma (talk) 01:11, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, The Abnormal Guy! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation 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! Akevsharma (talk) 01:11, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Help me report a user who has vandalized Sanusha

Hi, I would like discuss with you about an user User:Sumitchauhaan16 who has vandalized the infobox of Sanusha. Link below:
https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Sanusha&diff=1136760756&oldid=1136017869&diffmode=source

How can we protect articles from such unnecessary edits or at the least report such issues in future. Would like to have your input. Aadirulez8 (talk) 05:57, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Aadirulez8: Cases for vandalism like these should be reported at WP:AIV.The Abnormal Guy (talk) 14:49, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Iratta has been accepted

Iratta, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️^{Let's Talk !} 06:26, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Pathaan album.jpeg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Pathaan album.jpeg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:33, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Let's Get Married (2023 film) has been accepted

Let's Get Married (2023 film), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

MaxnaCarta (talk) 00:15, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Iratta poster.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Iratta poster.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:14, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Maaveeran 2023 film poster.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Maaveeran 2023 film poster.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:17, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock

@Jpgordon: Before creating Thankam (film), I once saw the article on Wikipedia and copied the source code for the article. That may be why it's identical, because it should be. I did copy it but I only added one or two sections in the article. So, what can you do to prove that I am not a sock. Also, some articles I created were deleted. I worked hard to create them. Please restore them. Please help me. The Abnormal Guy (talk) 03:21, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Some other reviewer may come to a different conclusion than I have, and they may unblock you. I can't get past the fact that this account created the article in exactly the same order as the other account. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 03:57, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jpgordon: Can you ask any other reviewer to do something please? Thank you. The Abnormal Guy (talk) 05:56, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Other volunteers will note your request on the list and respond when they wish to. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 05:57, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot: So, is there no way for me to get unblocked? If any, can join tell me how? The Abnormal Guy (talk) 07:59, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The standard offer is probably your only path forward, but even then you still need to address the reason for the block. It's not enough to just say "I'm not a sock" because every sock says that. As I said, this could be meat puppetry but you don't seem to even concede that's a possibility. And yes, creating articles that blocked users created previously can be sock/meat puppetry. That's one reason why users shouldn't sock in the first place. 331dot (talk) 08:19, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot: OK fine. I will not edit for 6 months. After that, is it ok if I contact you? Also, I didn't know that creating an article that blocked users previously created was considered sockpuppetry or meatpuppetry. But I want to let you know that I have not socked. Please let User:Mkdw, the admin who blocked me, know about the current situation. Another thing: I appreciate your behaviour towards other users. You are the only reviewer who has actually listened to my words. For that thanks. Have a nice day. The Abnormal Guy (talk) 08:55, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As I've reviewed a request I cannot review another, so no, I don't need to be contacted. 331dot (talk) 09:02, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:War 2019 film album cover.jpeg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:War 2019 film album cover.jpeg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:51, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]