Yajmir

Welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Editing tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Simplified Manual of Style

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:

• Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
• Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
• Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
• No edit warring or abuse of multiple accounts.
• If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
• Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
• Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Kautilya3 (talk) 07:25, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

August 2018

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Bahun. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. Kautilya3 (talk) 07:25, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

October 2018

Hello, I'm Oshwah. I noticed that in this edit to Bahun, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:27, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

Edit warring warning

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Glory2Suriname (talk • contribs) 13:56, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

Enough pinging

I already mentioned once that you could stop pinging me. Please stop now. Simonm223 (talk) 16:11, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

• And do NOT falsely accuse editors of vandalism. Look it up: WP:VANDAL. Drmies (talk) 17:53, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I have been wrongly blocked by Bbb23 It must have been a mistake. I just reported Gandhawaria_Rajput as a sock puppet account of Glory2Suriname which is why I reported in the talk page of admin Bbb23. I put the indentation to mean that I was reporting Glory2Suriname. This must be a mistake. I forgot to put -- before my signature and the admin must have been confused that I was reporting myself i.e. Yajmir but I was the one doing the reporting.

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
  1. understand what you have been blocked for,
  2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
  3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. SQL^{Query me!} 18:52, 20 October 2018 (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.

Help

Hey Simonm223 can you help me. I got blocked by Bbb23 for reporting sock puppet accounts Glory2Suriname and Gandhawaria_Rajput on Bbb23 talk page . I was blocked for being a sock puppet of the very accounts I was reporting. There must have been some kind of misunderstanding.

Clarification

Hey Bbb23 can you clarify why I was blocked?

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I was blocked by Bbb23 with the following reason "User:Gandhawaria Rajput". This is the name of the user I reported to the admin Bbb23 for being a sockpuppet of Glory2Suriname with whom I had long discussion on talk pages of Bahun but I was the one that was blocked instead. Even though it was checkusers block I am extremely sure that it was a mistake. I am not related to Gandhawaria_Rajput or Glory2Suriname which were the users I was reporting to Bbb23. You wouldn't want to block a user without legitimate reason would you. I can vouch my life on it that I am not Gandhawaria_Rajput. I want third fair opinion on this because I have discussed with Bbb23 and he has refused to review his decision. This may be some one off case of Admin mistake. So I would like some other admin to confirm that a mistake have been made because the blocking admin has refused to review his decision. Thank you for your time .-- Yajmir (talk) 01:57, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Decline reason:

I have reviewed the CU data - it is fairly compelling. I agree with Bbb23's assessment. Yunshui ^雲_水 07:53, 23 October 2018 (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.

 Administrator note I won't review this request as I have already declined a request here. This is substantially the same as the declined request above, and really isn't an unblock request. As such, it is very likely going to be declined again.

It's extremely unlikely that Bbb23 blindly blocked you without checking - especially as this is a checkuser block. checkusers rely on private technical details / system logs in order to determine if users are related. SQL^{Query me!} 23:23, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Even though it was checkusers block I am extremely sure that it was a mistake SQL. I am not related to Gandhawaria_Rajput or Glory2Suriname which are the users I was reporting to Bbb23.You wouldn't want to block a user without legitimate reason would you. I once made an edit logged out but that is it. If that is the problem then I want to rectify the situation and not do it again. --Yajmir (talk) 01:55, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

You didn't report the two users; the IP before you did.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:06, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Bbb23 No I wrote on your talk pages about the two users. I replied puttin indentation on previous comments on the Glory2Suriname that was reported by other guy to show that I agree with them and I added other of his sock puppet accounts Gandhawaria_Rajput which was already blocked in the complaints's comments with indentation. You can search my name on your talk pages. Maybe Glory2Suriname was already blocked by you. Here is what I wrote on your talk page "Here is another of his sock puppet account Gandhawaria_Rajput which has already been banned indefinitely. Please look into it. Yajmir (talk) 16:21, 20 October 2018 (UTC)" If it was about me editing logged out to revert vandalism by some sock puppet accounts I am ready to rectify. Please check with Checkuser because I am hundred percent sure on this.-- Yajmir (talk) 02:11, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

That's a reasonably correct version of what happened on my Talk page, and, no, you were not blocked for "reverting vandalism" while logged out. In any event, I will not consent to you being unblocked. The evidence demonstrates that you and Gandhawaria Rajput are the same person rather than Gandhawaria Rajput being a sock of Burbak. Apparently, your wish to make a false connection outweighed your common sense. I have nothing more to say.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:24, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Bbb23Why would I report my own account. That's illogical. I had lengthy discussion on talk pages of Bahun with the sock puppet account Glory2Suriname with Simonm223. He can attest to it. I am 100% sure on this. Please use checkuser again. I am not Gandhawaria_Rajput. I was reporting Gandhawaria_Rajput as sock of Glory2Suriname which was the person the comments on talk page I was replying to referring to. I was the one reverting his vandalism. If you are not ready to review I want third opinion because I am hundred percent sure on this. Otherwise I wouldn't waste your time Yajmir (talk) 02:31, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Bbb23 I am trying to be calm here because I have been unfairly maligned. I am not Gandhawaria_Rajput. Why would I report my own account to you? Please go through my edit history for further confirmation. I was not even reporting the account as being sock of Burbak who I don't even know who he is. I was just adding the name of Gandhawaria_Rajput as sock of Glory2Suriname. --Yajmir (talk) 03:21, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

@Bbb23:I would ask you again to review the decision to block me. I would like a arbitration committee to review my decision. Please tell me how I can do that. I am 100% sure of my innocence. Yajmir (talk) 04:02, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

@Bbb23:"Apparently, your wish to make a false connection outweighed your common sense. I have nothing more to say" --- What does this even mean? This just makes me angry. So you are just going to assume things about my "common sense" and what not and make stories so you can block a user? You know that you have a mistake and you are reluctant to backtrack because this would show you in bad light. I hope you make the right decision and unblock me. I know you got confused with my comment and thought I was the one being reported so you blocked me without proper evidence. I am just sad at Wikipedia and the conduct of its Admins. This is my only account that I made a couple of months ago and I had made only few edits till now, that too undoing the vandalism by some sockpuppets. I recently started to edit some pages of Nepali personalities but now I am blocked for reporting a user. I am just going to wait and hope that other admins will be fair to me. This is my only account which I hope to get reinstated quickly and I am not going to make other accounts. I even added my personal email to the account recently so I could mail Admins to help me get unbanned. I hope common sense prevails here, instead of assuming things. What about Assume Good Faith and stuff. --

Yajmir (talk) 15:10, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Good hand - bad hand comes to mind. Will leave this open for further review.-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 05:54, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

The user Gandhawaria_Rajput and other of his sockpuppets have been vandalizing pages of Nepali ethnic groups like Khas, Chettri, Bahun since long time. Why would I report an account that was already banned if I was playing Good Hand - Bad Hand (I searched google for this). I just wanted to bring the account to the attention of admin so that it could be listed as sockpuppet of other accounts like Glory2Suriname. Nothing more. -- Yajmir (talk) 06:22, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

• Please stop pinging me.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:12, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Please review your decision to ban me. I am innocent. You blocked me for reporting a user for no reason, blaming me as as the very user I reported. The user and his sockpuppets had wrote nasty thing about Nepali people which I tried to undo. This is why I reported the user to you, so you could list him as sockpuppets Yajmir (talk) 15:15, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

I stepped in on this dispute because it was an interesting looking topic that was facing trouble due to what appeared to be a heated edit conflict between Yajmir and Glory2Suriname - I don't edit much on the weekends, Wikipedia is mostly something I do when I have a few minutes of down-time at work between tasks, but I did pop by the page on Saturday to reply to a few comments on talk from G2S upon which, Yajmir advised me that G2S had been indeffed for socking. At that time the page content appeared to be somewhat improved from the previous version, which seemed a WP:COATRACK for making controversial negative claims about a caste-derived ethnic sub-grouping. However I am categorically not a checkuser, and I have seen plenty of odd behaviour on Wikipedia. Somebody pulling a 4chan style troll where they play out both sides of an argument would be a new one to me here, and I prefer to assume good faith, but I likewise cannot be a character witness here. If Bbb23 says that both sides of this dispute were played out by the same account based on checkuser data, I'm inclined to believe them; they've never given me any reason to doubt their ability in this regard. Simonm223 (talk) 11:46, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

@Simonm223:Why would I play out both side of the dispute?Glory2Suriname and his sockpuppets have been vandalizing Nepali pages for a long time. He is obsessed with Nepali ethnic groups and keep claiming that Bahun and Chettri are mongoloids or Cannibals or Adivasis or low caste and whatnot. I am just angry that I was accused like this. I can't even vent anywhere at this injustice in the fear that they will completely ban me. Please believe me. I just recently started to edit Nepali pages. Before that I had pages like Bahun, Aryal etc on my watchlist, so I could undo vandalism from Glory2Suriname and his sockpuppets. Why would I report myself to the admin? That is just illogical. When I reported Gandhawaria_Rajput he was already banned. I reported to the admin that he is just a sockpuppet of Glory2Suriname and other of his accounts. Please believe me. -- Yajmir (talk) 11:54, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

I've asked you before not to ping me more than once in a conversation I'm clearly watching. Please don't do so again. Frankly I'm not the one you should be trying to persuade; I have no authority here. I am simply saying that I trust Bbb23's judgment implicitly. Simonm223 (talk) 11:57, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

OK Sorry. You are the only person I have conversed in Wikipedia. So maybe I thought you could help me. When I reported Glory2Suriname and Gandhawaria_Rajput, both accounts were already banned. I went out of my way to help other users, so these two accounts could be listed as sockpuppets of plethora of his other accounts and reported to the admin. -- Yajmir (talk) 11:59, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

I will write a detailed account of what happened so that some admin may see it. In the beginning I had never made an edit to Wikipedia. But later I made an edit to the wiki page named Baral. I did it logged out. After some time I made an account with the user name Yajmir. I made one edit on the page that the wiki threw at me. I searched google for more info and added some info to the wiki page. Later I went to the Bahun page and I saw someone had maligned the ethnic group. So I made an edit there. But it was reverted soon. So I again made the edit and kept the page on my watchlist. I also edited the page Aryal which is a surname of Bahun ethnic group. Someone again had written wrong info about Aryal. I also edited the page Katto and kept these pages in my watchlist. Then I stopped making edits at Wikipedia but kept watch on my watchlist to see if someone would vandalize the page. No one vandalized the page again until few days ago when someone reverted my edit that I had made few months ago. It was done by Glory2Suriname. I reverted the page but forgot to add edit summary. So it was reverted by someone. I then reverted the page with edit summary but I was reported for edit warring. Luckily I was not banned. Then I tried to do the write thing and went to the Talk Page of Bahun and wrote the section regarding Katto. Then I had a length discussion with the user Glory2Suriname on the issue. At first I had thought that he was being genuine and we were having genuine discussion. I spent a day discussing with him. But later I checked his edit history and I saw that he had a history of maligning Nepali ethnic grooup. He had an obsession with making claims that Bahun and Chettri are not Indo-Aryan ethno-linguistic group but they were mongoloid. He would keep editing pages on Bahun, Chettri and Khas people and vandalize the page writing nasty things about mongoloid, Adivasi, Cannibalism etc. I then realized that he was a troll. So I stop discussing things with him on talk page of Bahun. The discussion took me whole day. Next day I made edit to Bahun logged out. I changed the section 'Social Taboos' to 'Royal Funerary rites'. I didn't realize then Glory2Suriname was already banned back them. But him not reverting my edits were very suspect. But my edits were reverted by Gandhawaria_Rajput who again wrote nasty things about Bahun ethnic group of Nepal. But they were quickly reverted by someone else. Gandhawaria_Rajput was also banned quickly. He also had obsession with Bahun ethnic group, so I surmised that both Gandhawaria_Rajput and Glory2Suriname were the same person. So I went to Bahun talk page and told Simonm223 who was also montitoring the discussion on the Bahun talk page that the users we were conversing with turned out to be trolls and were banned indefinitely. So Simonm223(edit: It was someone else not Simonm223) put a strike on the discussion. I realized that Gandhawaria_Rajput and Glory2Suriname were sock puppets account of someone from Bihar region of India who had obsession with Nepali ethnic groups. Then I went to the admin page of the person who banned Glory2Suriname. He was Bbb23. In his talk page someone had already reported Glory2Suriname which is why Bbb23 had banned him. There in the talk page I saw that someone had listed the sock puppets accounts of Glory2Suriname which were numerous. So I thought I would do the right thing and report Gandhawaria_Rajput as another of his sockpuppets. Which is what I did. I then decided to edit some more pages related to Nepal. I edited the page of Madhav Prasad Ghimire who is National poet of Nepal of Bahun ethnicity. I translated more info from the Nepali version of Wikipedia. I also added reference and made edits to Bacchu Kailash and Nati Kaji who are famous singers of Nepal. I also edited Radio Nepal page and added more info from Radio Nepal's official page. Then I thought that I would add more Info to the Bahun page. Other ethnicites of Nepal had elaborate page on them. So I thought I would also add more info about Bahun culture, genetics etc. So at first I edited Bahun page and added a picture of RangaNath Poudyal to Bahun page who was a Nepali Prime Minister of Bahun ethnicity. But it was reverted by someone. I then decided to edit Bahun page and add more info on the ethnicity. But to my shock I was banned and couldn't edit. I was banned by Bbb23 who accused me of being Gandhawaria_Rajput, the very account I reported. I was devastated. I then made a appeal which was quickly rejected. I then made another appeal which is where we are having a discussion. I even added my personal email to the account, so I could mail the arbitration committee. After that I have had lot of things assumed about me. I have been blamed of being the very same account whose vandalism I have been trying to revert and who I reported to the admin. I have been accused of playing Good Hand Bad Hand by another admin. I have also been accused of conversing with myself. I have just gotten angry and have been looking for a place to vent at the injustice. But I feel helpless. This is my only wikipedia account and I have not made another account since being banned because I know that the block applies to person and not the account. I also have not made any edit logged out which is the wrong thing to do. I hope some fair admin sees this and looks into this situation with fair eyes. They can run Checkuser if they want to. It is their decision to make. I am innocent. I know this. I would let this go and never come back to wikipedia again. But being unfairly accused has been bugging me and I can't let it go until I am unblocked whether I make future edits on not. I hope I get justice. Thank You for reading this. -- Yajmir (talk) 14:10, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

This is factually inaccurate; I did not strike through any arguments on that page. The strike-throughs were from 86.170.110.98 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) - an IP address from southern England, whereas I live in Eastern Canada.Simonm223 (talk) 14:24, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Sorry I thought you were the one who made the strike through. I had asked you to delete the discussion thread. So I thought you did it. Sorry for the mis-information. -- Yajmir (talk) 14:26, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

I would also like to add that I deleted a paragraph from the talk page that didn't have a strike. -- Yajmir (talk) 14:27, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

@Yunshui:I can't believe that I am facing this injustice. This must be what it feels like to be convicted for a crime you didn't commit. I will try to do another unblock request one last time. My reasons aren't going to change. I have always told the truth. -- Yajmir (talk) 07:59, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Another 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).

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

---

Request reason:

I will make another unblock request. I have been unfairly blocked for being a sockpuppet account of another account I was reporting to the admin. My reasons aren't going to change from the previous unblock request reasons because I am telling the truth. I just want my account unblocked whether I further use Wikipedia or not. I don't like being accused for a crime I didn't commit. I hope that the privileges of admins who decided to block me unfairly are also taken away. I am just sad at Wikipedia admins and their conduct -- Yajmir (talk) 08:09, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Decline reason:

This is a check user block. Please reread the pertinent part of the WP:GAB. Talkpage access is not required. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 14:10, 23 October 2018 (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.

• I've revoked your access to this page for repetitive, disruptive comments and unblock requests.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:03, 23 October 2018 (UTC)