User talk:Grigorie77

Wikipedia and copyright[edit]

Hello Grigorie77, and welcome to Wikipedia. All or some of your addition(s) to CupruMin have been removed, as they appear to have added copyrighted material without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. 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 here.

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. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) 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.
Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
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 the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are PD or compatibly licensed) it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions, the help desk or the Teahouse before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
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 in Wikipedia:Translation#How to translate. See also Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

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, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 16:37, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 03:00, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:53, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 26[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Khaitan Public School, Ghaziabad, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Urban. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

December 2021[edit]

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely to prevent abuse.
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. You may instead email the Arbitration Committee at arbcom-enwikimedia.org with your username and appeal.

Administrators: CheckUsers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. Therefore, a Checkuser must be consulted before this block can be removed. Administrators undoing checkuser blocks without permission or the prior approval from a checkuser risk having their administrator rights removed by the Arbitration Committee (per this announcement).

Maxim_(talk)

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).

Grigorie77 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hi, seems to be locked to checkuserblock-account, I'm not very familiar with this problem but I understand that I'm somehow connected to another user (sarbrina.ok) whom I don't even know! I don't know why this happened, because this is my only wiki account that contributes to the wikipedia. There are currently some discussions in which I am accused of being related to the subject, you can see Khaitan Public School, Ghaziabad, where I explained in detail that I have no tangent. Eventually I am ready to prove in any way that only this account belongs to me. Just to be helped by someone how to do it. Thanks Grigorie77 (talk) 15:00, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You say you are ready to prove in any way that only this account belongs to you. Please do so, though I do not believe it will be possible for you to do this. The discussions over at Talk:Khaitan Public School, Ghaziabad raise enough concerns for me to decline this request. Yamla (talk) 10:58, 6 January 2022 (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.

CommentHi @Yamla:, I have analyzed this case in more detail as well as I assume full responsibility that this is my only wiki account. We also saw that in the past the account I am associated with has added spam links, we can see every change we have made that respects the wiki policies. What can I do as a simple user to prove I was wrongly blocked? About Talk:Khaitan Public School, Ghaziabad because I only focused on wiki policies, and if you look at the current page and the page I corrected according to the policies there are no big differences. Just because other users were probably interested in keeping only the negative on the page, just because I tried to create a neutral page, doesn't mean I have anything to do with it.

In conclusion, please do not overlook this case, because I still want to contribute to wikipedia.--Grigorie77 (talk) 13:26, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe it will be possible for you to prove this. You are welcome to try, though. Another admin will review your unblock request. --Yamla (talk) 14:01, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you @Yamla: for the advice, you are always welcome on my talk page with some guidance.--Grigorie77 (talk) 12:40, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Yamla:, I will be very grateful if you can review the unlock request (as another administrator said only those with advanced permissions can do it, otherwise we saw you in list WP:FUNC). As for the User:Sabrina.ok user I'm connected to, I tried to find a connection, where I found it to be a puppet of the User:Anisoara Popovici user, who worked on a common page Salt Edge Inc.. As in the end with none of the editors the same page they worked I didn't find any connection. Please take a look at the page I tried to edit Khaitan Public School, Ghaziabad according to the policies, where several discussions started, respectively I was attacked by another user as a vandal (the last changes proved otherwise), as in the end the page was returned in general to the neutral model that I tried to make. To be honest, I didn't expect to lose my account because of a random article I tried to make neutral changes to. Thank you in case you can help me with this problem.--Grigorie77 (talk) 16:44, 16 January 2022 (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).

Grigorie77 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

This creates the impression that it can lead to infinity, I have never faced such a thing to understand what is required of me. I am open to analyzing every change I have made, I have never vandalized wikipedia, on the contrary I try to fight vandalism on wikipedia. Because I still want to contribute positively to wikipedia and fight vandalism. I am also familiar with this issue, I want to explain that all the changes related to the School have been passed through the wikipedia policies, currently the version of the current page proves. I don't want to attack anyone, nor is it my right to do so. Each changes wikipedia in its own style and in this case there is probably a technical problem, it would be possible to have the same IP range. I understand that I have to somehow convince an administrator and no one wants to take responsibility in this case. As for my duty as an editor, it may be that someone as a curator can guide me so that I do not suffer such a thing in the future. I am honest with all of you and look forward to editing wikipedia as soon as possible. Grigorie77 (talk) 12:53, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Since you are alleged to be a sock of a globally locked user, (Sabrina.ok), I do not believe any administrator here, except those with checkuser access and familiarity with that user's edits, would be even allowed to unblock you. Sorry. — Daniel Case (talk) 05:37, 13 January 2022 (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.

CommentHi @Daniel Case:, can you help me tag such administrators? Or where can I find them? Thanks.--Grigorie77 (talk) 16:02, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Solved, thanks for the guidance!--Grigorie77 (talk) 16:56, 16 January 2022 (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).

Grigorie77 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hi, I ask for the help of an administrator with extended rights, to unblock access to changes on wikipedia. I made a detailed explanation on the talk page, but I did not receive any answer, I want to emphasize that I do not know any of the accounts with which I am associated. So I will be grateful if anyone can help resolve this misunderstanding. Grigorie77 (talk) 11:12, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Checkuser evidence indicates that you are abusing multiple accounts. I have confirmed it independently. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 08:11, 23 February 2022 (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.