Perfectodefecto

👋

Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end.

Basic Info

This user is a citizen of India.

MThis user is Male

22+This user is 22 years old

ଓଡ଼ିଆThis user is a native Odia speaker

हिंदीThis user understands Hindi language

engThis user can communicate in English language

✓This user has already created the first article

📧

Leave an E-mail here, if it is confidential.

Your submission at Articles for creation: ESPN World Fame 100 (December 4)

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:  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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:ESPN World Fame 100 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.

Theroadislong (talk) 18:12, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Perfectodefecto! 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! Theroadislong (talk) 18:12, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello Perfectodefecto! Your additions to Draft:ESPN World Fame 100 have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

• You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
• Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
• We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
• If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
• Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 14:54, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: ESPNcricinfo Awards (December 16)

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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:ESPNcricinfo Awards 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.

Theroadislong (talk) 11:42, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank You for your advices.

One Question, Is my current version article contained sufficient reliable sources.? Perfectodefecto (talk) 17:03, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

No. Your references confirm that some of the people won some of the awards. What is missing are references about the ESPNcricinfo Awards. When created? Why? By what organization? Confirming importance in the universe of cricket. Also, the by-year entries are hyperlinks. Not allowed. Either deleted or turn into referenced entries. (Which would still not contribute to establishing notability. David notMD (talk) 10:25, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

ESPNcricinfo has information on the history of the organization. Some of this may be useful to be copied into your draft, with attribution in the Edit summary for where you got it from. It has one sentence mention of creation of the awards, but no reference for that. David notMD (talk) 10:37, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank You for this help..

I have removed those hyperlinks. But, If I provide a reference to each awardee where the article was published by the ESPNcricinfo, just like Captain of the Year 2015. are these enough? or need more 3rd party sources including this.? Perfectodefecto (talk) 11:35, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

No, again. Referencing ESPNcricinfo is useless. Essential to have references about ESPN that are independent from ESPN. David notMD (talk) 05:09, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:ESPNcricinfo Awards has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:ESPNcricinfo Awards. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 14:28, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Champo (December 22)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by UtherSRG 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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Champo 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.

UtherSRG (talk) 00:34, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Speed Chess Championship (December 24)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Justiyaya 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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Speed Chess Championship 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.

Justiyaya 15:32, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

New articles

Hi, I'm a fellow editor. I hope you don't mind if I post here. I see that you are trying to find suitable subjects to create new articles about. I'm sure it has been mentioned that creating a new article is hard ... you need to find a subject that is notable per Wikipedia's standards, but not so notable that someone else has already written an article. This is tricky. Then there's gathering all the sources, then writing a draft that summarizes those sources, without letting any of your own (unsourced or unreferenced) knowledge or opinions into the draft. All while showing how and why the subject is worthy of an encyclopedia article.

Personally, I find it more interesting to edit existing articles to fix run-on sentences, or to look for sources in unsourced sections, to fix typos, etc. Not everyone is interested in that, but it has helped me learn the basics of how to create and "reference" an article.

Along with reading lots of articles... I sometimes try to guess for myself whether an article is good or bad, and why; and where it could be improved.

I think that one issue with your article on ESPNcricinfo is that there could be an article on the award itself, or an article on recipients (or recent recipients), or both. I'm not experienced enough to know how that is handled in WP. If those should be two separate articles, then your draft should be clear on which one it's trying to be. I could be wrong about all that, but if you are still working on it, maybe another narrowly-crafted query at the Teahouse or Help desk would get you some useful info about how to write either of those kinds if artickes. Or, find an article marked as a good article which us about a well-kniwn award. I hope this helps... David10244 (talk) 10:06, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

@David10244 I appreciate for your message. looking forward to my draft, I think the same that, there should be an article for each year and the recipients of respective years to be listed there. It will be easier for the readers to find out it in details, but, I have compressed these in one article for lacking of independent sources for each year. I found only countable references for a year, but, overally there are many as I have refferenced there. I feel these much sources are enough to establish its notability.

Coming to your idea, I welcome it. You may edit any of my draft article accordingly what it actually requires. and, I'm always ready to contribute to Wikipedia, so, I would love to write more articles if I get more subjects as per my interests. —Perfectodefecto 11:30, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Speed Chess Championship (January 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 TheChunky 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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Speed Chess Championship 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.

❯❯❯ Chunky aka Al Kashmiri (✍️) 02:43, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:ESPNcricinfo Awards has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:ESPNcricinfo Awards. Thanks! Twinkle1990 (talk) 08:53, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		Great job on ESPNcricinfo Awards PalauanReich (talk) 01:31, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: ESPN World Fame 100 has been accepted

ESPN World Fame 100, 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 List-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. 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 .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

GoingBatty (talk) 13:28, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Speed Chess Championship

Hello, Perfectodefecto. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Speed Chess Championship, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 03:03, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Champo

Hello, Perfectodefecto. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Champo, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 12:02, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Speed Chess Championship

Hello, Perfectodefecto. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Speed Chess Championship".

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!} 02:42, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:55, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

May 2024

Please stop. 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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:38, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Perfectodefecto,

Do not create User pages for other accounts that aren't yours. This is disruptive editing. If you want to change your username, ask for help at the Teahouse. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:39, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

@Liz I apologise. I won't repeat this mistake in future. —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 06:44, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Shyaam Nikhil P. has been accepted

Shyaam Nikhil P., 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 .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 10:49, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Sahil Chauhan (July 27)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by SafariScribe 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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Sahil Chauhan 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.

Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 17:15, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Arunita Kanjilal

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Draft:Arunita Kanjilal, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Bbb23 (talk) 00:49, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

Don't forget you must declare any conflict of interest you may have in relation to the topic of the draft. There appears to be no claim of notability; is she a personal acquaintance or perhaps someone who approached you to write an article about her? Deb (talk) 08:27, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Pawandeep Rajan has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Pawandeep Rajan. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 10:36, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Pawandeep Rajan (August 18)

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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Pawandeep Rajan 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.

Theroadislong (talk) 10:37, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Sahil Chauhan has been accepted

Sahil Chauhan, 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 .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

C F A 💬 19:11, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Pawandeep Rajan (August 20)

Your recent article submission has been rejected and cannot be resubmitted. 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 Robert McClenon was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: Note to AFC Reviewers: This draft is for a title that was previously an article, but was then cut down to a redirect. If this draft is accepted, the history should be preserved. Do not tag the redirect for G6.

If you find that this draft should be accepted, and do not have the Page Mover privilege, please request assistance in moving the redirect to preserve the history.

Reviewers should check the history and verify whether there was a consensus to cut the article down to a redirect, or whether the action was taken boldly without discussion. If there was a consensus for the cutdown, do not accept this draft without verifying that the draft improves the article or that consensus has changed. If in doubt, please discuss.

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pawandeep Rajan. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pawandeep Rajan (2nd nomination).

This draft is substantially the same as the most recent version that was cut down to a redirect. If moved into article space, this draft would be deleted as G4. The article title has been fully protected, so that I could not accept this draft if I wanted to accept it, but I do not want to accept it.

This draft has been Rejected by a reviewer in the Articles for Creation review process. DO NOT resubmit this draft or attempt to resubmit this draft or prepare or submit a draft that is substantially the same as this draft without discussing the reasons for the rejection. You may request a discussion with the rejecting reviewer, or you may request a discussion with the community at the Teahouse. A discussion will not necessarily agree to a resubmission. If this draft is resubmitted, or an attempt is made to resubmit this draft or an equivalent draft, without addressing the reasons for the Rejection, a topic-ban or a partial block may be requested against the submitting editor, and the draft may be nominated for deletion.

You may ask for advice about Rejection at the Teahouse.

Robert McClenon (talk) 06:11, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Blocked

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 review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

"But, a few months after I joined my first account got banned due to various reasons." is admission of block evasion, and the same person admitted at User talk:Maheswar Rana to having used this account there. It's possible that this person will get User:Tamzin/Adverse possession unblocked eventually, but this situation can't just be ignored. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:12, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Then, What should I do to continue my work on Wikipedia. I want to keep contributing to Wikipedia someway... —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 07:09, 21 August 2024 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

Hi, I got blocked for having multiple accounts, which is valid as per the Guidelines. I apologise for this. But, I had no negative intention to create this account. I have clearly mentioned what was happened with me at User talk:Maheswar Rana, which forced me to create this account then. and, I have proofs to support this claim. Moreover, I have contributed Wikipedia with this account so, at least this account should be unban to continue my positive works. —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 04:52, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Decline reason:

You need to return to your original account and handle this there. The block of your original account is on you personally, not just your account. While it is blocked, you may not edit under any account or IP address until the original block is removed. 331dot (talk) 08:27, 21 August 2024 (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.

@Pppery: @331dot: This looks like a WP:CLEANSTART account to me. I wouldn't have blocked it but rather asked the editor to be transparent about the other account (which he was, above). That wasn't an admission of sockpuppetry if the other account had not been used in at least a year before this one was created. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:41, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

You can't clean start if your original account is blocked. Any user who has currently active bans, blocks or other sanctions imposed (including, but not limited to, those listed here); or is currently or about to be formally discussed for their conduct (such as at an administrative noticeboard or in an open case with the Arbitration Committee); or is attempting to evade scrutiny, may not have a clean start. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:12, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

I accept that this account was created and used with good intentions, but they shouldn't get a clean start just because they waited out their block before creating a new account. A five year wait would have been a strong point in favor of unblocking, had they asked first. 331dot (talk) 18:07, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

The blocking admin is OK with unblocking, and so am I. This seems like a situation where a user with good intentions, not meaning to do any harm, got caught up in a network of rules unknown to the user until now, and has been completely transparent about everything. I see no problem with trust, no problem with good faith, no problem with sincerity to be a positive contributor here. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:40, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Last Note

I have lost all the hopes of returning to Wikipedia. It seems I've been punished rather than restricted. Whatever rule is rule, I respect the decisions that they've made so far. However, It was a different scenario than what most of them are perceiving it.

I've clearly mentioned my problems which I had then, on my first account's User talk page. and, in details here, which I had sent to one of the admins adding these proofs.

I'm not seeking for any sympathy here, it was actually happened with me so, I did explain it. Now it's upto them, to decide. I'm waiting for it but, I have no hope unless someone sees it from my perspective.

I had always been wanting to contribute to Wikipedia, I did somehow. I am happy about that. But, not satisfied, as I could've added more content in the coming days, which is now quite impossible to achieve.

It wasn't just me. There might be many others who were interested in contributing to Wikipedia but, were discouraged by similar situations. The Wikipedia Committee should give them a chance to showcase their skills or allow them to continue contributing what they've been doing.

I'm quitting Wikipedia now, along with my first account. It was a well-spent time, although it's now worthless. If someone is reading it today after a day, week, year or decade. Please, help me out of this situation. I am always ready to contribute to Wikipedia willingly.

Thank You Wikipedia Community and all the Wikipedians who have come accross my journey and shaped me well. I'll always be grateful to you all. —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚖𝚊𝚒𝚕) 04:24, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

You're unblocked. Please contact me on my talk page if you have any questions or need any advice. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:16, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Got a chance

I have been unblocked. a big relief indeed.

Many Thanks to Anachronist who supported me and, made it possible. Otherwise, it was nearly impossible.

Apart from this, I have learnt many things during this period. Which can be helpful in future definitely.

Now I'm looking forward to keep contributing to Wikipedia as before. —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 19:08, 26 August 2024 (UTC)