User talk:Sundaram7
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Copyright issue with Confederation of Human Rights Organizations
Hello. Concerning your contribution, Confederation of Human Rights Organizations, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a direct copy from http://www.humanrightskerala.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3&Itemid=6. As a copyright violation, Confederation of Human Rights Organizations appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Confederation of Human Rights Organizations has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. If the source is a credible one, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source.
If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GFDL, you can comment to that effect on Talk:Confederation of Human Rights Organizations. If the article has already been deleted, but you have a proper release, you can reenter the content at Confederation of Human Rights Organizations, after describing the release on the talk page. However, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Garion96 (talk) 13:39, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] ndf
I noticed you tried to edit it. Its Ganeshco (who edits from Saudi Arabia I think) who tries to cover up their role in massacring Hindus and torturing non-Islamic activists in Kerala. I have not seen your edits otherwise, but they usually get caught up in ganeshco's edits, at which point I revert.Bakaman 21:45, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Welcome
|
Rumpelstiltskin223 18:23, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Hinduism
|
|||
|
Rumpelstiltskin223 18:23, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Kerala parade 1.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Kerala parade 1.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 21:14, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Sockpuppets
I have blocked a number of accounts identified as your sockpuppets following investigation at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Pens withdrawn. Be advised that using multiple accounts to comment on or edit the same articles is strictly prohibited. I am not taking action against you at this time, future sockpuppetry will result in temporary blocking of this account as well. Thatcher131 02:22, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] 3rr
Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly, as you are doing in National Development Front. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. Lionheart5 10:01, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Lionheart5 , See the history by yourself. You will see how many edits are being done by you repeatedly. Regadring the 3RR, dont worry about that, there are administration procedures to look after this. Dont bother about this too much. Thank you. -- Sundaram7 10:12, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Yes, there are admin procedures, they're called blocks, and you will likely get one unless you follow my advice in the talk page (create a draft in the talk page, and file an RfC to get other editors involved). Lionheart5 10:40, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] AMA
I would like to volunteer to take the case you filed on 11 February (Wikipedia:Association of Members' Advocates/Requests/February 2007/Sundaram7), as no other advocate seems to have taken it on yet. You specifically requested a non-Indian advocate; I am non-Indian and have never been to India, so I can be neutral in this dispute. If you accept my offer of advocacy, I will change the case status to Open accordingly. Walton Vivat Regina! 20:09, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Blocked for sockpuppetry
It has been proven that you have involved in sockpuppetry. You have been previously warned regarding the same. Hence I have blocked you for 2 weeks. Please do not evade your block during that period, and do not create sockpuppets again. - [User:Aksi_great|Aksi_great] (talk) 18:07, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
- Hello Aksi_great, this decision and blocking has something odd in it:
- How I can be a sockpuppet of somebody who are in different countries. All the sock-pupperty case under my id is invalid and they need to be removed. There is only one "SUNDARAM7".
- Please crosscheck the IP addresses.
- Also, can you point out any vandals, 3RR, abuses from my side?
- Why you are not tracking the other users who are really involved in vandalism.
- So I suggest to cross check this decision and bring a legitimate decision. The decision from the user:Jpgordon is not truthful and with no evidences. --- Sundaram7 13:12, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- Hello Aksi_great, you are just keeping silence on my requset. This doubles my doubts that you are biased on this decision and you are abusing the administrator's rights. This doubles also the doubts that you are bised to some of the POV pushers as mentioned here: [1].Sundaram7 09:05, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Blocked me for sockpuppetry .. why!!
I have blocked you because you were engaged in sockpuppetry. The checkuser on your accounts returned a confirmed result. Confirm means no doubt. Hence I had blocked you. I don't know anything about different countries. I don't know how you came to know from which country the other account originated. - Aksi_great (talk) 11:47, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
- see my reply at [2].-- Sundaram7 14:15, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
- I never forced Jpgordon to perform the checkuser. I just asked him why he declined the case. He thought over it again and decided to run the checkuser and gave a confirmed result. Another thing - 59.160.207.14 is not and has never been proved to be Hkelkar. Hkelkar also edits from USA. If you want to continue playing this game, please play it somewhere else, not on my talk page. - Aksi_great (talk) 14:25, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] What is the base for sockpuppetry confirmation
You said: "You have confirmed that I am sockpuppet of many users from declining the my requset for unblocking[4]. Could you let us know what is the basis for this confirmation."
- Basis for the confirmation is Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Pens withdrawn. If you want any more details, you can try contacting the person who performed the checkuser. --Yamla 15:41, 7 April 2007 (UTC)