Farzanfa007

September 2019

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to West Block Blues, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Coderzombie (talk) 10:24, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Manjappada Kerala Blasters Fan Club (September 6)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by AngusWOOF was:  The comment the reviewer left was: 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:Manjappada Kerala Blasters Fan Club and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Manjappada Kerala Blasters Fan Club, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, 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.

AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 13:17, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Farzanfa007! Having an article 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! AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 13:17, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

Please do not disrupt the Pages for protection page by placing your requests in the wrong section. Regards. Lectonar (talk) 10:29, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

And you did not wait for the draft to be given the green light..it is now back in draftspace. Please work on it before republishing. Consider this a warning. Lectonar (talk) 10:34, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Tinkerhub

Hello, Farzanfa007,

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Meatsgains and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I have tagged Tinkerhub for deletion, because it doesn't appear to contain any encyclopedic content. You may find our guide for writing quality articles to be extremely informative.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top. If the page is already deleted by the time you come across this message and you wish to retrieve the deleted material, please contact the deleting administrator.

For any further query, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Meatsgains}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Meatsgains^(talk) 02:18, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

September 2019

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to introduce inappropriate pages to Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. If you need guidance on how to create appropriate pages, try using the Article Wizard. Coderzombie (talk) 09:05, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Manjappada Kerala Blasters Fan Club has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Manjappada Kerala Blasters Fan Club. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 15:22, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Manjappada Kerala Blasters Fan Club (September 10)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was: 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:Manjappada Kerala Blasters Fan Club and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Manjappada Kerala Blasters Fan Club, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, 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.

Theroadislong (talk) 15:23, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Manjappada Kerala Blasters Fan Club (September 12)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by AngusWOOF was: This submission is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: That's enough. You just added back the social media websites and resubmitted, thus violating WP:ELMINOFFICIAL.

AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:11, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

September 2019

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you use Wikipedia for promotion or advertising, as you did at Manjappada. Coderzombie (talk) 17:58, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Block notice

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:52, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

• You cannot create new accounts to continue your disruptive editing.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:52, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

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).

Farzanfa007 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

In 2019 and 2020, I made four single-purpose accounts solely for the purpose of publishing Draft:Manjappada Kerala Blasters Fan Club. Despite being blocked, I created a user account called Akevsharma from which I made more than 5000 positive contributions. Now it's been three years and I have since become more involved in various areas of Wikipedia, including the AFC, where I am one of the top reviewers. Over the past three years, I have made no disruptive contributions to Wikipedia and have only made constructive edits. Therefore, I believe that the block I received for past disruption is no longer necessary and I hope that my mistake from three years ago made in ignorance of the basic guidelines of Wikipedia will be forgiven. I have made over five thousand productive edits from Akevsharma. I have exposed several UPEs and sockfarms involved in UPE. The recent SPI was even opened by one among them. Now the circumstances have changed, so I'm requesting an unblock request. Pinging admins Vanjagenije and Extraordinary Writ who were actively involved in the recent SPI. Farzanfa007 (talk) 10:32, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Decline reason:

No chance of an unblock while you continue evading your block. Indeed, you are far, far closer to a community ban than you are to being unblocked. Your best bet at this point is to go six months with zero edits, then apply under WP:SO. Yamla (talk) 11:49, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

---

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.

I have decided not to submit any further unblock requests at this time. I had hoped that my contributions over the past three years would have been taken into consideration and I am disappointed that things did not turn out as expected. I know there are no special considerations for good faith edits. But I'm disappointed because my situation is very unique. However, I am ready to wait for six months. Farzanfa007 (talk) 15:37, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Sorry to see this, Akevsharma. One thing to note is that you're only blocked from the English Wikipedia: you're still welcome to edit on other Wikimedia projects, for instance the Hindi Wikipedia or the Simple English Wikipedia. If you spend the next few months making constructive edits on other Wikipedias, it's more likely that your standard offer appeal will ultimately be successful. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 18:04, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Extraordinary Writ, thank you for your support in this condition. May I ask if I should be contributing to Wikipedia using this account or my other account, Akevsharma? Also, if this account gets unblocked, what will happen to my other account which has more than 5000 positive contributions? My plan is to mainly focus on editing football-related articles, which I worked on during my earlier days on English Wikipedia. Is it correct to assume that every notable article on English Wikipedia is also eligible for an article on Simple English Wikipedia? Farzanfa007 (talk) 07:35, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

WP:SOCKBLOCK says that you should usually use your original account unless you have a good reason not to. If you want to use the other account, maybe ask the blocking administrator (Vanjagenije) for permission first. (Unfortunately it's not possible to merge two accounts together.) On notability, the Simple English notability guideline looks almost identical to our GNG, so the standards should be very similar. I don't have much experience with Simple English Wikipedia, though, so you might want to ask there (e.g. at simple:Wikipedia:Simple talk) if you have any more questions. Best of luck! Extraordinary Writ (talk) 07:50, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Your suggestion Vanjagenije? Farzanfa007 (talk) 09:20, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

About what? Vanjagenije (talk) 14:22, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

@Vanjagenije, Should I use the original account to make edits on other Wikimedia projects or can I use Akevsharma? Farzanfa007 (talk) 00:31, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

I don't know the policies of other projects, they are independent from English Wikipedia. Here, in English Wikipedia, blocks are issued to persons, not to accounts. If you, as a person, are not blocked, then you can use any account as long as the use is not WP:ILLEGIT. I guess the situation is similar in other projects. Vanjagenije (talk) 09:31, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

I will be editing from Akevsharma. Farzanfa007 (talk) 13:43, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Unblock Request

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

Farzanfa007 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Dear blocking administrators RoySmith, Vanjagenije Ponyo and the whole community, on 15 March 2023, my current account Akevsharma was blocked from editing English Wikipedia after an SPI was opened against me, where I committed that I evading the block for three years. I hope I deserve another chance because of the following reasons

• My first account was originally blocked for edit warring. However , my last account (Akevsharma) has no serious warnings for edit warring or any other issues since its creation in April 2020
• There is a considerable amount of edits on the current account, dating back years, showing my ability to contribute constructively.

I was unaware of how Wikipedia operated. Since then, over the past three years, I've gained a lot of knowledge about Wikipedia and its workings and have contributed significantly from the account Akevsharma. I was also not using any other accounts simultaneously during that time. The admin Extraordinary Writ has also commented [1] that the sockpuppetry was very minor, it was years ago, and Akevsharma has made thousands of constructive edits since. Now I have waited for over six months without zero evasion and made some contributions on the Simple English Wikipedia. In this period, I have made no edits on English Wikipedia, using any present or new accounts or anonymously while logged out. Thus, I would like to use the Standard Offer. I have already learned from my mistakes three years ago. However, I apologize for everything to everyone for what I did before creating Akevsharma and believe that I deserve a second chance. Please unblock my account Akevsharma and I will keep making productive and constructive contributions. Farzanfa007 (talk) 15:52, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Accept reason:

Based on the responses below, I'm unblocking. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 02:16, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

• From a CU perspective, I see no evidence of socking in the currently available data. I'll leave it to somebody else to decide if they want to unblock, but you can consider the obligation to consult with a CU per WP:CUBL to have been fulfilled. RoySmith (talk) 16:06, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
• I'll wait for Vanja to given his opinion, but as far as WP:GAB and WP:SO are concerned, I think this appeal hits the mark.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:03, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
  • I have no objections to unblocking. Vanjagenije (talk) 20:56, 14 September 2023 (UTC)