User talk:Svpnikhil

This is Svpnikhil's talk page, where you can send him 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.

Hello, Svpnikhil, and

welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for registering an account.
I hope you like the place and decide to stay.


	Introduction 5 The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Help Tips	How to write a great article Manual of Style Be Bold Assume Good faith Get adopted

If you need help, ask me on my talk page, or get instant online help at IRC.
You can also place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will come shortly to answer your questions.

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 11:54, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Guidance

If you have a

conflict of interest, please don't write about yourself

, your friends or relatives and read the guidance below:

When you write about a person, you must provide
independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that they meet the notability guidelines
. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the person or an associated organisation, press releases, YouTube, IMDB, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, blogs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the person claims or interviewing them. Note that references should be in-line so we can tell what fact each is supporting, and should not be bare urls.

You must write in a

non-promotional

tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic, with verifiable facts, not opinions or reviews.

There shouldn't be any url links in the article, only in the "References" or "External links" sections.

You must not copy text from elsewhere. Copyrighted text is not allowed in Wikipedia, as outlined in
this policy. That applies even to pages created by you or your organisation, unless they state clearly and explicitly that the text is public domain. We require that text posted here can be used, modified and distributed for any purpose, including commercial; text is considered to be copyright unless explicitly stated otherwise. There are ways to donate copyrighted text to Wikipedia, as described here
; please note that simply asserting on the talk page that you are the owner of the copyright, or you have permission to use the text, isn't sufficient.

Before attempting to write an article again, please make sure that the topic meets the notability criteria linked above, and check that you can find

conflict of interest, and you must disclose the nature of that COI. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:09, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

You have ignored everything I have said above, and on my talk page, and posted identical spam from two accounts without answering my sock puppet query. I have blocked both accounts for sock puppetry and spamming. You can appeal against the block by posting {{unblock|reason=}} here Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:57, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

Sir @Jimfbleak I read that sock puppetry page and changed the article. I dont have multiple accounts. The person who wrote the article after it getting deleted contacted me after 5 days through some other mutual persons. He narrated what had happened and I told him I will help being a wikipedia contributor for the past 10 years. I kept the today's article in draft it means allowing others to change it.I dont have any multiple accounts. Previous article was written by other person who dont have any Idea regarding WP policies. This is my own account. Please unblock me. I will refrain from writing this article.

Decline reason:

What you are describing is sockpuppetry. Please reread

WP:SOCK. Yamla (talk) 12:37, 10 June 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 text for Draft:P.V.Sunil Kumar and Wikipradical's for Draft:PV Sunil Kumar are virtually identical. I've fixed your request above, so someone will review in due course Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:36, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding deletion of page Draft:PV Sunil Kumar.

@Jimfbleak, @Yamla I have gone through the sockpuppetry page and understood. I have attended 4 Wiki conferences,meetings and I admire wikipedia. I want to contribute much more. Please unblock me. Svpnikhil (talk) 13:17, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You know the procedure for appealing against blocks, use it. To have any hope, you need to be transparent about issues like multiple accounts and conflict of interest, make it clear that you understand the editing guidance I have given abovem, and say what you will write about if you are unblocked, i don't think P.V Sunil Kumar will be an acceptable topic Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:39, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS appeal #74967

is closed. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 07:43, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

I'm not a paid editor. I want to access my account.Svpnikhil (talk) 08:39, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You will need to do as you have been asked above and be completely transparent here as to any connection you have with Mr. Kumar, how you came to edit about him, and if you are working with others to do so(which you kinda described above). I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 09:29, 18 June 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 draft article, Draft:Peddi Ramarao

Hello, Svpnikhil. It has been over six months since you last edited the

Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Peddi Ramarao

".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia

mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion

. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:59, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock Appeal

This user is asking that his block be reviewed:

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

Request reason:

Hello reviewer,

I took some time to review the policies the administrators that reviewed my work on the article 'PV Sunil Kumar' so far referenced and after deliberations with neutral third-parties, I realized what I missed in my previous appeals.

Here I present the sequence of events as my memory best serves:

On Jun 08 2023, a friend of a friend ("Wikipradical") reached out to me requesting assistance with an article they were having trouble with getting accepted into Wikipedia. With only an intention to help an individual contribute to Wikipedia, I set out to edit their draft which at the time was placed in 'Articles For Deletion' space. I have no affiliation and no relation to this 'PV Sunil Kumar' and all statements made in the draft at the time were cross-checked by me using the URLs provided in the same draft. I'm not associated with either pv sunil kumar or wikipradical.

Reflecting on that last statement, now I admit that I set out to write about someone that I myself do not know of to judge if content on them meets Wikipedia guidelines for notability.

I am not aware either of the relationship between this 'PV Sunil Kumar' and the friend of a friend ("Wikipradical"). Stating that, now I commit to enquiring any possibilities for 'Conflicts of Interest' when I run into requests like this in the future.

I now realize that despite my intentions to enhance the knowledge base that Wikipedia is, the content I tried to assist with does not meet Wikipedia guidelines for notability.

Thereafter, on 10 Jun 2023, "Sock puppetry" concerns were raised with an administrator blocking my account. I focused too much on the term ("Sockpuppetry") in preparing my responses on 13 Jun 2023 and on another term used ("multiple accounts") in preparing my responses on 18 Jun 2023. At both times, I did not attend to the administrator's basic questions and hence this response.

I believe I have disclosed all relevant information that helps explain the suspicion of sockpuppetry. I declare that there is no paid-for work performed and all editing was done in good faith. In case you determine additional information/disclosures are required, please let me know.

Once the ban is lifted, for content related to 'PV Sunil Kumar' and anyone/anything else, just as I do for my own contributions, I'll do my due diligence before accepting any requests for creation/edits from others. I've always responded to administrators'/moderators' queries and hereafter I'll also enquire from that perspective when someone else like "Wikipradical" reaches out to me instead of just resubmitting their content.

I appreciate the time you spent reviewing this response.

Thanks Svpnikhil (talk) 15:18, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notes:

In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=Hello reviewer,
I took some time to review the policies the administrators that reviewed my work on the article 'PV Sunil Kumar' so far referenced and after deliberations with neutral third-parties, I realized what I missed in my previous appeals.
Here I present the sequence of events as my memory best serves:
On Jun 08 2023, a friend of a friend ("Wikipradical") reached out to me requesting assistance with an article they were having trouble with getting accepted into Wikipedia. With only an intention to help an individual contribute to Wikipedia, I set out to edit their draft which at the time was placed in 'Articles For Deletion' space. I have no affiliation and no relation to this 'PV Sunil Kumar' and all statements made in the draft at the time were cross-checked by me using the URLs provided in the same draft. I'm not associated with either pv sunil kumar or wikipradical.
Reflecting on that last statement, now I admit that I set out to write about someone that I myself do not know of to judge if content on them meets Wikipedia guidelines for notability.
I am not aware either of the relationship between this 'PV Sunil Kumar' and the friend of a friend ("Wikipradical"). Stating that, now I commit to enquiring any possibilities for 'Conflicts of Interest' when I run into requests like this in the future.
I now realize that despite my intentions to enhance the knowledge base that Wikipedia is, the content I tried to assist with does not meet Wikipedia guidelines for notability.
Thereafter, on 10 Jun 2023, "Sock puppetry" concerns were raised with an administrator blocking my account. I focused too much on the term ("Sockpuppetry") in preparing my responses on 13 Jun 2023 and on another term used ("multiple accounts") in preparing my responses on 18 Jun 2023. At both times, I did not attend to the administrator's basic questions and hence this response.
I believe I have disclosed all relevant information that helps explain the suspicion of sockpuppetry. I declare that there is no paid-for work performed and all editing was done in good faith. In case you determine additional information/disclosures are required, please let me know.
Once the ban is lifted, for content related to 'PV Sunil Kumar' and anyone/anything else, just as I do for my own contributions, I'll do my due diligence before accepting any requests for creation/edits from others. I've always responded to administrators'/moderators' queries and hereafter I'll also enquire from that perspective when someone else like "Wikipradical" reaches out to me instead of just resubmitting their content.
I appreciate the time you spent reviewing this response.
Thanks [[User:Svpnikhil|Svpnikhil]] ([[User talk:Svpnikhil#top|talk]]) 15:18, 29 March 2024 (UTC) |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=Hello reviewer,
I took some time to review the policies the administrators that reviewed my work on the article 'PV Sunil Kumar' so far referenced and after deliberations with neutral third-parties, I realized what I missed in my previous appeals.
Here I present the sequence of events as my memory best serves:
On Jun 08 2023, a friend of a friend ("Wikipradical") reached out to me requesting assistance with an article they were having trouble with getting accepted into Wikipedia. With only an intention to help an individual contribute to Wikipedia, I set out to edit their draft which at the time was placed in 'Articles For Deletion' space. I have no affiliation and no relation to this 'PV Sunil Kumar' and all statements made in the draft at the time were cross-checked by me using the URLs provided in the same draft. I'm not associated with either pv sunil kumar or wikipradical.
Reflecting on that last statement, now I admit that I set out to write about someone that I myself do not know of to judge if content on them meets Wikipedia guidelines for notability.
I am not aware either of the relationship between this 'PV Sunil Kumar' and the friend of a friend ("Wikipradical"). Stating that, now I commit to enquiring any possibilities for 'Conflicts of Interest' when I run into requests like this in the future.
I now realize that despite my intentions to enhance the knowledge base that Wikipedia is, the content I tried to assist with does not meet Wikipedia guidelines for notability.
Thereafter, on 10 Jun 2023, "Sock puppetry" concerns were raised with an administrator blocking my account. I focused too much on the term ("Sockpuppetry") in preparing my responses on 13 Jun 2023 and on another term used ("multiple accounts") in preparing my responses on 18 Jun 2023. At both times, I did not attend to the administrator's basic questions and hence this response.
I believe I have disclosed all relevant information that helps explain the suspicion of sockpuppetry. I declare that there is no paid-for work performed and all editing was done in good faith. In case you determine additional information/disclosures are required, please let me know.
Once the ban is lifted, for content related to 'PV Sunil Kumar' and anyone/anything else, just as I do for my own contributions, I'll do my due diligence before accepting any requests for creation/edits from others. I've always responded to administrators'/moderators' queries and hereafter I'll also enquire from that perspective when someone else like "Wikipradical" reaches out to me instead of just resubmitting their content.
I appreciate the time you spent reviewing this response.
Thanks [[User:Svpnikhil|Svpnikhil]] ([[User talk:Svpnikhil#top|talk]]) 15:18, 29 March 2024 (UTC) |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=Hello reviewer,
I took some time to review the policies the administrators that reviewed my work on the article 'PV Sunil Kumar' so far referenced and after deliberations with neutral third-parties, I realized what I missed in my previous appeals.
Here I present the sequence of events as my memory best serves:
On Jun 08 2023, a friend of a friend ("Wikipradical") reached out to me requesting assistance with an article they were having trouble with getting accepted into Wikipedia. With only an intention to help an individual contribute to Wikipedia, I set out to edit their draft which at the time was placed in 'Articles For Deletion' space. I have no affiliation and no relation to this 'PV Sunil Kumar' and all statements made in the draft at the time were cross-checked by me using the URLs provided in the same draft. I'm not associated with either pv sunil kumar or wikipradical.
Reflecting on that last statement, now I admit that I set out to write about someone that I myself do not know of to judge if content on them meets Wikipedia guidelines for notability.
I am not aware either of the relationship between this 'PV Sunil Kumar' and the friend of a friend ("Wikipradical"). Stating that, now I commit to enquiring any possibilities for 'Conflicts of Interest' when I run into requests like this in the future.
I now realize that despite my intentions to enhance the knowledge base that Wikipedia is, the content I tried to assist with does not meet Wikipedia guidelines for notability.
Thereafter, on 10 Jun 2023, "Sock puppetry" concerns were raised with an administrator blocking my account. I focused too much on the term ("Sockpuppetry") in preparing my responses on 13 Jun 2023 and on another term used ("multiple accounts") in preparing my responses on 18 Jun 2023. At both times, I did not attend to the administrator's basic questions and hence this response.
I believe I have disclosed all relevant information that helps explain the suspicion of sockpuppetry. I declare that there is no paid-for work performed and all editing was done in good faith. In case you determine additional information/disclosures are required, please let me know.
Once the ban is lifted, for content related to 'PV Sunil Kumar' and anyone/anything else, just as I do for my own contributions, I'll do my due diligence before accepting any requests for creation/edits from others. I've always responded to administrators'/moderators' queries and hereafter I'll also enquire from that perspective when someone else like "Wikipradical" reaches out to me instead of just resubmitting their content.
I appreciate the time you spent reviewing this response.
Thanks [[User:Svpnikhil|Svpnikhil]] ([[User talk:Svpnikhil#top|talk]]) 15:18, 29 March 2024 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

Thanks for email, your request will be reviewed by an independent admin Jimfbleak - talk to me? 18:25, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]