User talk:DevilTheOptimizer

Welcome![edit]

Hi DevilTheOptimizer! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Geniac (talk) 07:55, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Shubh Yatra has been accepted[edit]

Shubh Yatra, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

<br><br>{{subst:uw-coi-warn|declared}}~~~~

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

DreamRimmer (talk) 06:50, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reply[edit]

If you have a conflict of interest, you must declare it, please don't write about yourself, your friends or relatives and read the guidance below:

When you write about a person, you must provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that they meet the notability guidelines. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the person or an associated organisation, press releases, YouTube, IMDB, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, blogs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the person claims or interviewing them. Note that references should be in-line so we can tell what fact each is supporting, and should not be bare urls.

Your text is all either unsourced or referenced to interviews with her, we need independent third-party sources, not her talking about herself

You must write in a non-promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic, with verifiable facts, not opinions or reviews.

It's basically a fan page, her first name used throughout and gushing stuff like she embraced every opportunity that came her way, big or small... Her motto is to seize every opportunities for the valuable experiences it brings... The studio quickly became a beloved destination... Anmol worked wonders with her makeup skills, creating mesmerizing bridal and glamorous looks that left people captivated by her talent... I'd remind you that if you are being paid to write this promo, you must declare it

There shouldn't be any url links in the article, only in the "References" or "External links" sections.
You must not copy text from elsewhere. Copyrighted text is not allowed in Wikipedia, as outlined in this policy. That applies even to pages created by you or your organisation, unless they state clearly and explicitly that the text is public domain. We require that text posted here can be used, modified and distributed for any purpose, including commercial; text is considered to be copyright unless explicitly stated otherwise. There are ways to donate copyrighted text to Wikipedia, as described here; please note that simply asserting on the talk page that you are the owner of the copyright, or you have permission to use the text, isn't sufficient.

Before attempting to write an article again, please make sure that the topic meets the notability criteria linked above, and check that you can find independent third party sources. Also read Your first article. If you are writing about yourself, or someone you know as a friend, colleague, client, employer or relative, you have a conflict of interest, and you must disclose the nature of that COI. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:48, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: BaagadBillaa (June 29)[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 S0091 was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of films). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Local coverage is not helpful. Its not a matter of proving the film exists. Please read WP:NFILM (also linked above and the previous decline).

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:BaagadBillaa and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

S0091 (talk) 20:27, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DevilTheOptimizer! Having an article draft 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! S0091 (talk) 20:27, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Saiyar Mori Re for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Saiyar Mori Re is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Saiyar Mori Re until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

DonaldD23 talk to me 17:18, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Paperpopscissors per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Paperpopscissors. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 16:20, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbb23 Dear Bbb23, I already mentioned the concern in my unblock request 2 times and it was rejected. I submitted 3rd request a weeks ago and no has review it. Can you go through this? As I already told that it's just misunderstanding.

Unblock Request[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).

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

Request reason:

My account was banned due to an alleged association with multiple accounts, specifically with the user 'Paperpopscissors.' I want to clarify that I have no connection with the mentioned user and do not possess any other accounts. I solely own the 'DevilTheOptimizer' account. Can you please review and lift the ban on my account? Thank you.

Decline reason:

Simple denial is not sufficient. Please address the concerns raised at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Paperpopscissors. Yamla (talk) 17:04, 16 November 2023 (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.

Thanks for reply.

In regards to page intersection, I regularly update articles about Gujarati Cinema. I believe there are only a few individuals who contribute to the improvement of articles on Gujarati Cinema, and just because of that it states my intersection with any individual? I simply edit to improve articles.

I have also been accused of using multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Paperpopscissors. I want to clarify that I do not own or control this account. I already have my own account and I am happily contributing to Wikipedia. You can review my edits. @Yamla

Still awaiting for response. @Yamla

I have already reviewed your request. If you wish to be unblocked, please make a new unblock request and another admin will review it. --Yamla (talk) 11:37, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock Request[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).

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

Request reason:

I regularly update articles about Gujarati Cinema. I believe there are only a few individuals who contribute to the improvement of articles on Gujarati Cinema, and just because of that it states my intersection with any individual? I really don't know why I'm accused for such reason. I simply edit to improve articles. I have also been accused of using multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Paperpopscissors. I want to clarify that I do not own or control this account. I already have my own account and I am happily contributing to Wikipedia. You can review my edits. DevilTheOptimizer (talk) 11:52, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

It isn't just that you edit in the same broad topic area, but you edit similar specific articles. 331dot (talk) 15:54, 17 November 2023 (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.

There are merely few articles for Gujarati Cinema who meets the guideline. I already mention that there are only few people who actually create that and if someone creates and I improve does this mean sockpuppet? Please check my edits again, and see I improve articles by following guideline, and made necesarry changes whether with the data or grammatical. I'm really confused about this. I just dig and found Nizil Shah and Ankitbhm are mostly create articles for Gujarati Cinema, so if I edit articles created by anyone will made me sockpuppet? So I really apologise as I haven't read such Wikipedia Guideline, and that's the reason for blocking me. Do let me know what should I can do. @331dot

You may make another unblock request for someone else to review. It might help if you agreed to abandon editing in that topic area at least for a time. 331dot (talk) 18:19, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's been 14 Days and no one has reviewed unblock request yet. Can you let me know what can I do? @331dot

@Coderzombie Hi, My account is block and the reason for the block is Sockpuppet. I already submitted request 3 times and it was rejected 2 times. I also made 3rd request however no one has responded to it yet. I already explained that, there are merely few People who contributing in Gujarati Cinema and I belive you're already aware of that, so if you or anyone created article or made edits and in that same articles I make improve doesn't shows anything like sockpuppet. Can you let me know what I can do now as my unblock request is still pending.

@Coderzombie I'm awating for the response.

Unblock Request[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).

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

Request reason:

It's been month I submitted the request now. I regularly update articles about Gujarati Cinema, and there are merely few individuals who contribute to the improvement of articles on Gujarati Cinema, and just because of that it shouldn't states my intersection with any individual. I simply edit to improve articles. I have also been accused of using multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Paperpopscissors, and I want to clarify that I do not own or control this or any other accounts. I already have my own account and I am happily contributing to Wikipedia, you can have a look at my edits as well. Hence for a while I'll not make edits in articles regarding Gujarati Cinema. I hope this finds well. DevilTheOptimizer (talk) 05:46, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

It's been a while and I hate for you to have to end this wait with a decline, but really, the language of your request seems to suggest to me that you've been editing with another account during this period. You'll have to offer more clarity about this. — Daniel Case (talk) 07:16, 5 January 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.

Orphaned non-free image File:Bhaskar Bose.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Bhaskar Bose.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 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 for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:07, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Submitting Unblock Request as No one is responding[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).

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

Request reason:

Made another request as no one is responding to my earlier request.

I regularly update articles about Gujarati Cinema, and there are merely few individuals who contribute to the improvement of articles on Gujarati Cinema, and just because of that it shouldn't states my intersection with any individual. I simply edit to improve articles. I have also been accused of using multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Paperpopscissors, and I want to clarify that I do not own or control this or any other accounts. I already have my own account and I am happily contributing to Wikipedia, you can have a look at my edits as well. Hence for a while I'll not make edits in articles regarding Gujarati Cinema. I hope this finds well.

Decline reason:

Procedural decline: Please don't open more than one request at a time. I'm sorry for the delay, but the backlog is large and appeals are tackled in no particular order. The best way to expedite the process is to formulate an appeal that is clear, concise, and convincing. You may edit your original appeal at any time, as long as nobody has responded to it. --Blablubbs (talk) 18:34, 26 December 2023 (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.

DevilTheOptimizer (talk) 15:45, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock Request 5[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).

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

Request reason:

I'm submitting 5th Unblock Reason. My last request declined for the reason that I was editing with another account. I'm clarifying that I haven't made any edits since my account got block as I don't own any other account. I've mentioned this every time that I solely own DevilTheOptimizer account only. My account got block as someone find that I'm using multiple account, as there were merely few people editing about Gujarati Cinema so some articles might edited by me and the other user. The respected use who block the account consider that I'm using multiple account, although I don't own or know the account user at all. I had tried to convey this message 4 times hence my request are denied. I'm again confirming that I solely own DevilTheOptimizer and because of misunderstanding I'll not make any edits regarding Gujarati Cinema for a while. I really hopes that this finds well.

Decline reason:

You haven't indicated what other articles you would be working on. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:25, 12 January 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.