Rajeshbm
Rajeshbm (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I have committed errors i admit.I will not repeat them again.Please unblock Rajeshbm (talk) 22:12, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that
- the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
- the block is no longer necessary because you
- understand what you have been blocked for,
- will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
- will make useful contributions instead.
Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 22:25, 13 November 2020 (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.
Rajeshbm (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I now understand what I have been blocked for and I am sorry for it.I shall not repeat the same mistakes like I did before and shall strive and learm to contribute to wikipedia in a constructive and positive manner.
- I tried to repeatedly edit two articles because they caught my eye as I was reading the press and did not quite understand how to do it. One was an attempt to remove certain sections of the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N._Ravikiran which when I read-Saw a notice on top which said it was written like an advertisement-I did not quite get that and instead of going to the Teahouse and learning I blind edited and removed certain sourced sections in the article which I thought were repetitive and again could not differentiate between the Subject and certain matter there which were published but people across the spectrum know were fake media. I should again, have gone to the Teahouse to get an understanding of this, which I did not, for which I am sorry. I also tried to upload an image onto the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vappala_Balachandran which turned out to be a copyright violation, but that was not the intention. I wanted the page to have a photograph because most Wikipedia pages do. It was a mistake, as I did not use the correct terms in describing the licensing and the source. There however, is a template on the page, which says I am connected to the subject, which is untrue. I know of the subject/individual but not personally. I wish to improve both these articles and a few others, which have browsed, that contain false information for which I shall seek the help of the Teahouse and get my queries sorted. There are numerous typos in articles I came across which I wish to fix. I did the retirement thing and wanted to vanish because no one reached out to me the way you did asking me to explain. I might have done more harm I am Human and am bound to make mistakes, we all are. But I have no intention of disobeying Wikipedia guidelines and I will not repeat the mistakes again. I am only doing this in my spare time as I am passionate about Wikipedia and the ecosystem that that is ever evolving. Please unblock me and give me a chance. Thank You
I have explained what I have to honestly above-Regarding the lines "I pointed out that you have both stated repeatedly that you are Vappala Balachandran, and stated that you are not he, and never said you were. Both can't be true". I have admitted to the mistakes I have said apologized for giving you a runaround and will not repeat it again-ever. I am terribly sorry. I am not a paid editor, I edit because I want to learn and it is my passion. I am not Appeal Balachandran, like I said, I had stated so because I did not have an understanding of image uploading procedures-which I shall learn and not repeat what I did the last time around again. If I do and you get a sense that I am not telling you the truth, you are free to block me forever. But please give me one chance to change and reform. You are also free to put back the block notice on my page- I just pressed the edit button and removed everything. I had little and half baked knowledge but promise to go back to the Tea House and learn. Rajeshbm (talk) 16:59, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
Decline reason:
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 wish to leave edit
Since you are continuing to remove prior declined requests before the block is removed, which you were warned against, and you seem to go back and forth on if you are retired or not, I am removing talk page access. Should you more firmly change your mind that you want to participate here, you may use WP:UTRS to request unblock. 331dot (talk) 02:02, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arnav Srivastav until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.