User talk:Siddhartananda

Hello Siddhartananda and welcome to Wikipedia! We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your contributions do not conform to our policies. For more information on this, see Wikipedia's policies on vandalism and limits on acceptable additions. If you'd like to experiment with the wiki's syntax, please do so in the sandbox (but beware that the contents of the sandbox are deleted frequently) rather than in articles.

If you still have questions, there is a new contributors' help page, or you can click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia.

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• Help pages
• Tutorial

I hope you enjoy editing and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! —C.Fred (talk) 14:24, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop doing that. You will be blocked if you continue to modify signatures on talk pages.--regentspark (comment) 17:03, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

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 ~~~~}}.  Drmies (talk) 14:56, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DeltaQuad, following the CU results I came across two rangeblocks of yours, that suggest this is to be filed under Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Tubslubeamorepersempre/Archive. RoySmith, Callanecc, I see you two have been active on that SPI, and maybe you can update it. This is CU-confirmed with Relaxwikis, for example. Drmies (talk) 15:03, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Callanecc:, How should I proceed? It was my understanding that once a case is archived, it shouldn't be touched. On the other hand, I assume Drmies knows what he's doing, so seeking guidance. -- RoySmith (talk) 16:33, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Haha RoySmith, that's precisely what I thought I could leave to you all! No, I think we can just add this one to the archive--otherwise we'd have to open a new one, pro forma since the account is already blocked, and have a clerk take care of that. I'm just going to stick the name in the archive and see if I can find a tag. Drmies (talk) 17:47, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

---

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 why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

---

Administrators:

IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

Drmies (talk) 17:49, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply

]