Jump to content

User talk:Sriharsha7969

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Your submission at Articles for creation: AP24x7 (April 21)

[edit]
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 when they have been resolved.
Theroadislong (talk) 21:00, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, Sriharsha7969! Having an article 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) 21:00, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

May 2019

[edit]
Information icon

Hello Sriharsha7969. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat SEO.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists, and if it does not, from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Sriharsha7969. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Sriharsha7969|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. bonadea contributions talk 19:36, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Warning icon Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to remove speedy deletion notices from pages you created yourself, as you did at Draft:AP24x7, you may be blocked from editing. bonadea contributions talk 06:37, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Block evasion and conflict of interest

[edit]

Four different accounts that you have used, and a couple of IP addresses, have been blocked from editing Wikipedia. When you are blocked, you can't simply create a new account - that is block evasion and violates Wikipedia's policy on use of multiple accounts. Furthermore, you have never addressed the question of conflict of interest/paid editing despite being asked to do so on this user talk page and several times previously on your other user talk pages. That is disruptive and contrary to Wikipedia's purposes. Bottom line: do not use Wikipedia to promote your TV channel. Thank you. --bonadea contributions talk 07:47, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

May 2019

[edit]
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).

Sriharsha7969 (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

hi Justlettersandnumbers (talk) here I am requesting you to unblock me and I make sure that in future this will not repeat again and I will strictly follow the guidelines of Wikipedia thank you. Sriharsha7969 (talk) 13:17, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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. MER-C 13:43, 11 May 2019 (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.