User talk:Sashanka Singh

February 2024[edit]

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sockpuppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. utcursch | talk 14:21, 13 February 2024 (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).

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

Request reason:

I'm not sockpuppet nor i voilente any guidance, I edited with historical evidence and ASI report refference

Decline reason:

Even if you aren't the same person you have essentially proxied to make the same bad edits. —SpacemanSpiff 07:49, 16 February 2024 (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.

The above does not make much sense, but please explain how you made a similar edit to other blocked sock puppets. Thanks. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:50, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Utcursch: Is 24 hours the duration you intended? -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:52, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, that was by mistake. Will change to indef. utcursch | talk 21:03, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@-- Deepfriedokra ~ The thing is that if I have read the previous edit of this page, I had seen the previous edit in it. So in one edit, there was a good explanation in the edit and the sources were also used historically and the main thing is that the sources used in this page are also there. And if many sources are telling from the inscription then it is historically correct, so I just did the right thing and added the other good sources that I found and also those of ASI. Apart from that, I did not do any misbehavior or voilent. I only want to correct the pages of Chandel and etc. dynasty historically. And I saw many edits of this user which is with the source, can I use that also? Can you please give me permission I promise I will not do all edit with sources and will not voilent any page like him.

Look, I understand that you have blocked him but if the source like Chandelas of Jejakabhukti by Vaidya etc, then has he used this also, will you deny it? Tell me yourself, if there is only one book and there is information in it, then that is the source and where to get it from? Similarly, he has used almost all of them, I have read a lot of them, I have used them so that the admin does not have any problem regarding the source.