User talk:Dineshyazz

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Dineshyazz, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! SwisterTwister talk 07:29, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Mudichur, sub-urb Chennai, Tamil Nadu) has been reviewed![edit]

Thanks for creating Mudichur, sub-urb Chennai, Tamil Nadu, Dineshyazz!

Wikipedia editor 333-blue just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Add.

To reply, leave a comment on 333-blue's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Your recent edits[edit]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 05:19, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Mudichur road during chennai flood.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Mudichur road during chennai flood.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:38, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Dinesh k[edit]

Hello Dineshyazz,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Dinesh k for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 07:26, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 5[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tambaram, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Metro. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:55, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and copyright[edit]

Hello Dineshyazz, and welcome to Wikipedia. All or some of your addition(s) to Varadharajapuram has had to be removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material without permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributing to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from your sources to avoid copyright or 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 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 designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. However, there are steps that must be taken to verify that license before you do. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are public domain or compatibly licensed), it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at the help desk 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 can, but please follow the steps in 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) 01:47, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Baoringdao Bodo[edit]

The article Baoringdao Bodo has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Article about a footballer who fails WP:GNG and who has not played in a fully pro league.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Sir Sputnik (talk) 19:47, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In order for a subject to have an article on Wikipedia it must meet certain inclusion criteria called notability. For footballers, the relevant notability guideline that describes a footballer is and is not notable is WP:NFOOTBALL. It says that a footballer is notable if he has played for his country's senior national team or in one of the fully professional leagues listed here. It also explicitly excludes youth football as a source of notability, and clarifies that played in this context means having actually appeared in a match and not just being signed to a club. Bodo has done neither of these things so the article does not meet the inclusion criteria at present, though it may do so in the future. Accordingly, I have nominated the article for deletion. You can find the discussion here. I hope that answers your questions. Sir Sputnik (talk) 20:35, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 9[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sembakkam, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Metro. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:41, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 25[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Medavakkam

added a link pointing to Metro

Sholinganallur

added a link pointing to Adyar

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:33, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 28[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tamil Nadu, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Salem. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:52, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Hello, Dineshyazz. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

February 2017[edit]

Hello, I'm Utcursch. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on V. K. Sasikala ‎, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source, so I removed it. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! utcursch | talk 06:54, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons, as you did to V. K. Sasikala. Thank you. utcursch | talk 06:56, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unreferenced or poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial, to articles or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at V. K. Sasikala. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. utcursch | talk 07:02, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy by inserting unsourced or poorly sourced defamatory or otherwise controversial content into an article or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at V. K. Sasikala.

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for contravening Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy, as you did at V. K. Sasikala. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. utcursch | talk 07:08, 3 February 2017

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).

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

Request reason:

I've done some mistakes in editing the page so Pl help me to unblock me because I have lots of watch list to add information.Ive done created lots of pages in Chennai city for others to get info about particular places so kindly help me to get unblock well this is first time in getting blocked Chinnama vazhka iis it ok now thevidia sasikala vazhka k Dinesh 07:21, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Decline reason:

You have made no attempt whatever to address the reason for the block. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 13:05, 4 February 2017 (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.

Hi. Please explain what was wrong with the edits you were making, to make it clear to a reviewing admin that you really do understand the problem. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:26, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Calling V. K. Sasikala a "thevidia" (Tamil for "whore") in your unblock request will not help you, especially when you were blocked for vandalizing that article. utcursch | talk 00:00, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Having learned of that, which fits in with Dineshyazz's attacks on the V. K. Sasikala article (thanks utcursch), I have escalated the block to indefinite and have revoked talk page access. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 00:24, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

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

UTRS appeal #17708 was submitted on Mar 10, 2017 07:10:00. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 07:10, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your message on User talk:Dineshyazzz: The last block was been imposed by User:Boing! said Zebedee.

@Boing! said Zebedee: The user has apologized more than once on UTRS / other talk pages, and promises contribute well. Maybe give him a second chance? utcursch | talk 19:21, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

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

UTRS appeal #17775 was submitted on Mar 14, 2017 11:44:10. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 11:44, 14 March 2017 (UTC) [reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

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

UTRS appeal #17876 was submitted on Mar 25, 2017 06:21:57. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 06:21, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page access restored[edit]

I have restored your ability to edit this talk page so that you can make an appeal against your block - on the understanding that if I see any further BLP violations here I will remove it again. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:56, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock my account[edit]

talk(talk) Boing! said Zebedee (talk)

User page:

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).

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

Request reason:

Dear administrator I have now fully aware of policies and restrictions about Wikipedia. I can Now understand both Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy and the policy on personal attacks, and that I understand why these policies are important. After came to know about these policies, I can certain that unblocking my account will be in the best interests of Wikipedia administrators iam hopeful now admin will give me second chance thank youk Dinesh~~

Decline reason:

Are we to believe you seriously did not see anything wrong in accusing others of murder without evidence? Or calling them names? If you had to read our policies to learn that was inappropriate, I'm glad we could contribute to your education, but I do not expect that unblocking you will improve the encyclopedia. Huon (talk)

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.

😊.k Dinesh 05:14, 26 March 2017 (UTC)}

(k Dinesh 05:18, 26 March 2017 (UTC)).

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

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

UTRS appeal #17887 was submitted on Mar 26, 2017 05:34:23. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 05:34, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock[edit]

your page:

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).

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

Request reason:

Yeah its wrong in accusing others of murder without evidence? Or calling them names? But I've done that without knowing wiki rules and it's a mistake that I want to avoid everytime because it taught me great lesson I've feel absolutely ashamed to do like that feel sorry for vandalised real person page and its my fault and I have apologise for my attitude and now I'm aware of Rules and policies of wiki and I'm sure I will be helpful in adding valuable info in respective wiki pages.Im just asking you guys plz just give me second chance well we are all humans we do mistakes now I'm trying to rectify my mistakes and unblock my account just give me a chance without giving me chance how could you consider yourself I'm still in same mode..plz unblock my account (k Dinesh 11:34, 1 April 2017 (UTC))

Decline reason:

Under the circumstances a standard offer approach could be taken in this case. PhilKnight (talk) 00:07, 14 April 2017 (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.

Please note that User:Dineshyaz2 has been blocked for evasion and similar disruptive editing, including continued unsourced changes and the introduction of falsified material. Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 19:51, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]