User talk:Submitra: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Content deleted Content added
Syncing closed UTRS appeal status manually
Submitra (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 8: Line 8:
}} -- [[User:RoySmith|RoySmith]] [[User Talk:RoySmith|(talk)]] 20:24, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
}} -- [[User:RoySmith|RoySmith]] [[User Talk:RoySmith|(talk)]] 20:24, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
{{UTRS-unblock-user|27181|Oct 17, 2019 11:18:35|closed}}--[[User:UTRSBot|UTRSBot]] ([[User talk:UTRSBot|talk]]) 11:18, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
{{UTRS-unblock-user|27181|Oct 17, 2019 11:18:35|closed}}--[[User:UTRSBot|UTRSBot]] ([[User talk:UTRSBot|talk]]) 11:18, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

I, Shubhojoy Mitra (user Submitra) understand the reason for the block as sockpuppetry. It has been noted that there are four different users including me editing one article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Cisternostomy) from the same IP. The IP belongs to the internet connection of the premises of Techart Trekkies Pvt. Ltd. All users are part of the content development team who had been developing the article since it was initially written and submitted by me. The assisting content writer Anjan Sharma (user AnjanFMSharma) also declared being in our team working for the client. Subsequently, various edits have been made by two other team members who were tasked mainly to verify and format citations on the highly technical medical article on a new procedure of neurosurgery which has been gaining wide acceptance in many parts of the world. We have been working as a team to keep the article neutral, without COIs and precisely compliant of the rules of Wikipedia.

Overlooking the declaration of paid content writing of two other contributors was not intentional, just a mistake: the fact that we declared for myself and Anjan Sharma might explain our clear intention of following COI rules. In fact, the last edits were by Pratik Ratna Shakya (user the Protik) after a thorough check of copy-paste matches with provided citations and corrections. Technical phraseology tends to be similar in case of medical/surgical procedures which might have produced such concerns. While user Rachhita went for maternity leave, user the Protik recently joined to fill in for her. Any mails to [email protected] will receive an automated notice about this and a copy forwarded to Pratik.

I and the rest of the team can confirm that we are separate individuals collaborating to create content according to general guidelines and policies. Request to unblock the account seems to have been rejected because there is "no private information associated with your appeal". We need help to sort out the issue: what kind of private information may be provided so as to prove we are separate individuals working as a team and how? Once unblocked, the two other members will definitely add the declaration of doing paid work on behalf of the company for the client in their talk pages.

The members of our team are:
Shubhojoy Mitra (user Submitra, email id: [email protected]), official email id: [email protected]
Anjan Sharma (user AnjanFMSharma), email id: [email protected])
Rachhita Dhungel (user Rachhita, email: [email protected]), official email id: [email protected]
Pratik Ratna Shakya (user the Protik, email: [email protected]), official email id: [email protected]

As noted in investigations page, it is true I have been active as an editor/contributor back in 2014/2015 in my personal capacity. After a long gap for personal reasons and other engagements, it is only with this new assignment that I have authored the first article and we are working in a team doing appropriate research, etc. for maintaining high-quality and neutrality standards of the community as well the expectations of our client. On the other hand, the other three members are new to the Wikipedia community and created their accounts recently to collaborate on the project.

How can we verify we are separate individuals, and will this suffice for requesting unblocking so we may resume completing the draft article?
{{ping|RoySmith}}

[[User:Submitra|Submitra]] ([[User talk:Submitra#top|talk]]) 15:07, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:08, 17 October 2019


Sockpuppet investigation

-- RoySmith (talk) 20:24, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Submitra (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribsdeleted contribsabuse filter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


UTRS appeal #27181 was submitted on Oct 17, 2019 11:18:35. This review is now closed.


--UTRSBot (talk) 11:18, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I, Shubhojoy Mitra (user Submitra) understand the reason for the block as sockpuppetry. It has been noted that there are four different users including me editing one article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Cisternostomy) from the same IP. The IP belongs to the internet connection of the premises of Techart Trekkies Pvt. Ltd. All users are part of the content development team who had been developing the article since it was initially written and submitted by me. The assisting content writer Anjan Sharma (user AnjanFMSharma) also declared being in our team working for the client. Subsequently, various edits have been made by two other team members who were tasked mainly to verify and format citations on the highly technical medical article on a new procedure of neurosurgery which has been gaining wide acceptance in many parts of the world. We have been working as a team to keep the article neutral, without COIs and precisely compliant of the rules of Wikipedia.

Overlooking the declaration of paid content writing of two other contributors was not intentional, just a mistake: the fact that we declared for myself and Anjan Sharma might explain our clear intention of following COI rules. In fact, the last edits were by Pratik Ratna Shakya (user the Protik) after a thorough check of copy-paste matches with provided citations and corrections. Technical phraseology tends to be similar in case of medical/surgical procedures which might have produced such concerns. While user Rachhita went for maternity leave, user the Protik recently joined to fill in for her. Any mails to [email protected] will receive an automated notice about this and a copy forwarded to Pratik.

I and the rest of the team can confirm that we are separate individuals collaborating to create content according to general guidelines and policies. Request to unblock the account seems to have been rejected because there is "no private information associated with your appeal". We need help to sort out the issue: what kind of private information may be provided so as to prove we are separate individuals working as a team and how? Once unblocked, the two other members will definitely add the declaration of doing paid work on behalf of the company for the client in their talk pages.

The members of our team are: Shubhojoy Mitra (user Submitra, email id: [email protected]), official email id: [email protected] Anjan Sharma (user AnjanFMSharma), email id: [email protected]) Rachhita Dhungel (user Rachhita, email: [email protected]), official email id: [email protected] Pratik Ratna Shakya (user the Protik, email: [email protected]), official email id: [email protected]

As noted in investigations page, it is true I have been active as an editor/contributor back in 2014/2015 in my personal capacity. After a long gap for personal reasons and other engagements, it is only with this new assignment that I have authored the first article and we are working in a team doing appropriate research, etc. for maintaining high-quality and neutrality standards of the community as well the expectations of our client. On the other hand, the other three members are new to the Wikipedia community and created their accounts recently to collaborate on the project.

How can we verify we are separate individuals, and will this suffice for requesting unblocking so we may resume completing the draft article? @RoySmith:

Submitra (talk) 15:07, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]