Destroyer27
Destroyer27, you are invited to the Teahouse!
edit
|
Hi Destroyer27! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. We hope to see you there!
Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:04, 6 June 2019 (UTC) |
Welcome Destroyer27!
I'm Mathglot, one of the other editors here, and I hope you decide to stay and help contribute to this amazing repository of knowledge.
| Some pages of helpful information to get you started: | Some common sense Dos and Don'ts:
|
| If you need further help, you can: | or you can: | or even: |
Alternatively, leave me a message at my talk page or type {{helpme}} here on your talk page and someone will try to help.
There are many ways you can contribute to Wikipedia. Here are a few ideas:
|
|
To get some practice editing you can use a sandbox. You can create your own personal sandbox for use any time. It's perfect for working on bigger projects. Then for easy access in the future, you can put {{My sandbox}} on your user page. By the way, seeing as you haven't created a user page yet, simply click here to start it.
Please remember to:
- Always sign your posts on talk pages. You can do this either by clicking on the
button on the edit toolbar or by typing four tildes ~~~~at the end of your post. This will automatically insert your signature, a link to your talk page, and a timestamp. - Leave descriptive edit summaries for your edits. Doing so helps other editors understand what changes you have made and why you made them.
Formatting
editCan you please pay some more attention on formatting and properly indenting your talkpage posts? Posts like this one are really hard to follow.
- See WP:THREAD for on how to properly indent your talkpage posts.
- See WP:CHEATSHEET and use the "Link and name a website" format for external links
- See this or the accompanying video on how to format references.
You can also ask any questions here or at WP:TEAHOUSE. Abecedare (talk) 17:12, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
- @Abecedare:
- Sure. Give me some time to learn them. Thanks very much. Hope you're able to follow it now. Btw, I don't want to respond to that user who's been quarreling with me. He's made many personal attacks, and is being very mean to me. Please preclude him from partaking in the discussion. Can't engage with such unruly people. I'll respond to whatever questions you have.
- Thanks very much. Destroyer27 (talk) 2:30, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
- You also need to be able to see WP:Diffs, like this one. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:07, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
- Hi Destroyer27, sorry that I have been busy with other stuff to pay attention to the dispute at Pallava dynasty. However, some brief remarks on how to proceed. You are not using Diffs that I recommended above. When you need to refer to something that happened on a talk page, you need to provide a diff to other users so that they can check it. Please keep in mind that you are a new user and you have much to learn about how it all works. I will make some comments on the talk page once I digest what the dispute is about. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:19, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
- You also need to be able to see WP:Diffs, like this one. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:07, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
- @Kautilya3:,
All right, sure. Thank you very much. Also I must bring to your attention that the dispute is taking an ugly, racist turn, which is quite unfortunate. Also my opponent is conflating issues, bluffing, strawmanning, and making ad hominem attacks. Honestly, had never expected this. Anyway, keep advising me. I've come here to learn.
Best,
More wiki-format tips:
- [[User|Abecedare]] does not send me an alert (it is just a piped link to the wikipedia page User). Use {{reply|Abecedare}}, [[User:Abecedare]] or {{u|Abecedare}} to send a message alert to me (note the punctuation carefully; see WP:PING for detail]]).
- That said, in an ongoing active discussion, it is usually unnecessary to ping the participants (there are several exceptions that one learns about through experience). And since at Talk:Pallava dynasty, I am acting in my admin-capacity, I don't get any particular privilege to rule over purely content issues and should be pinged only if you or others wish to alert me to something that requires admin intervention, which usually involves conduct-issues (see WP:ADMIN although, again, the nuances of this are best learned through experience).
- You may want to try using User:Destroyer27/sandbox to compose your posts and test-out formatting and indentation options.
Let me know (or ask at WP:TEAHOUSE) if you have any questions about the above or other formatting issues. Abecedare (talk) 22:34, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi Destroyer27, in this post, you did four things, which you need to avoid in future.
- Added two blank lines at the beginning.
- Added a line break after "Dear Kautilya3".
- Added a blank line before the signature.
- Indented the signature.
All of these are problematic. When somebody looks at the discussion, they need to absorb multiple arguments from a single screenful of text. All the whitespace gets in the way. Indenting signature etc. give a disjointed look to your post, and they can't figure out how is saying what. Please check my reformatted version here for how to do it in the recommended way.
The guidelines at HELP:TALK should only take about 10 minutes to review. Those 10 minutes will be well worth it. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 07:40, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
New message from CASSIOPEIA
edit
Message added 08:41, 18 June 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Discretionary sanctions alert and notes
edit
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
Administrator note The dispute at Pallava dynasty does have a core of a content issue — which theories of Pallava origins should be included and if/how to distinguish between "mythological" claims and historically plausible ones — that is worth discussing (see next para). But, I'm afraid, that the content issue is being buried under the voluminous, poorly-formatted posts by LovSLif and you that often seem focused more on putting each other down than on collaborative editing based on sources and wikipedia content policies. The sniping has also spread to several other venues. This has become disruptive, is likely keeping other editors from participating in the discussion, and needs to stop.
The content issue needs to be discussed on the article talk-page with other interested editors but I'll provide some pointers to hopefully help redirect the discussion into more productive avenues. First, don't try to analyze primary sources and solve the problem of inclusion and weight de novo. Instead, look at how recent respected secondary sources handle the issue: for example, here is how Kulke and Rothermund (1986) discuss the origins. You can look at comparable general Indian history texts. Or, even better, find recent books and review articles dedicated to Pallava history that have been written and reviewed by scholars. Unfortunately, on a quick search I didn't find any obvious works to recommend in the latter category (the older ones like Jouveau-Dubreuil (1917) and Gopalan (1928) are far from ideal) but you and other editors may be able to dig some up with deeper effort.
(TL;DR) Try to limit the number, length and discursiveness of your posting on the topic and format the text, links and references properly. Focus on WP:HISTRS-compliant sources and content. And stop the personalization and the incivility. Abecedare (talk) 21:32, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
Unblock request
edit
Destroyer27 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Excuse me, I have been apparently blocked for the reason that I was using a sock account. That's absolutely false. I'd already requested my previous account to be vanished, and it was! I haven't used that account at all until now. And now it apparently has a different user name. I honestly do not know if that counts as a violation. But I haven't made a single edit from a certain "sock account" that was specified by a certain user who has blocked indefinitely, since I created this one. Please help.
Decline reason:
Destroyer27, your incremental admission of past activities only when confronted with undeniable evidence and constant refrain of being a "new user" in spite of being active since at least Oct 2018, does not engender confidence in your word. The constant disruption by and subsequent warnings received by this and earlier accounts, as well as your failure to simply read and follow WP:VANISH and WP:GAB (not to mention, simple formatting tips) does not demonstrate an ability to edit wikipedia constructively. Therefore I am declining the unblock request. You may wish to consider the standard offer but only if you spend at least some of the intermediate time familiarizing yourself with wikipedia policies, MOS, and etiquette. Abecedare (talk) 22:51, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
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.
- You asked that your previous account, Chippy pest (talk · contribs · count) be renamed to Desperate guy (talk · contribs · count), but your reason for the name change was "I want to delete my account. I don't want to be in any way affiliated with Wikipedia. I want all my personal details to be discarded, including my talk pages." You were told that vanished users normally have a certain style of username and asked you to confirm that was what you wanted. You replied "yes" (see here). Vanishing doesn't mean you can return to Wikipedia a couple of days later and continue editing in the same disruptive style as you edited with on the previous account and certainly doesn't tally with your own statement that you didn't wish "to be in any way affiliated with Wikipedia".--Bbb23 (talk) 19:52, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
- @Bbb23: Yes, that's true. I thought when username changes the account would automatically become dormant, or rather non-existent. But I do wish to contribute constructively to Wikipedia now. In fact, I currently am engaged in a discussion on a WP talk page. Since I was and is still a new user I didn't know a thing about that. And as I said I haven't made a single edit using that account, since I created this one. I haven't done anything wrong. I simply was unaware. Now I realize why a user here said that he can trace my IP address. Kindly consider my apology. Now I request that that account be deleted! User:Destroyer27 (User talk:Destroyer27) 8:00, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
- I don't follow most of what you're saying, but I do have a question: have you ever edited under yet another username?--Bbb23 (talk) 20:05, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
- @Bbb23: Yes, that's true. I thought when username changes the account would automatically become dormant, or rather non-existent. But I do wish to contribute constructively to Wikipedia now. In fact, I currently am engaged in a discussion on a WP talk page. Since I was and is still a new user I didn't know a thing about that. And as I said I haven't made a single edit using that account, since I created this one. I haven't done anything wrong. I simply was unaware. Now I realize why a user here said that he can trace my IP address. Kindly consider my apology. Now I request that that account be deleted! User:Destroyer27 (User talk:Destroyer27) 8:00, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
- Since the moment I created this account, absolutely not! User:Destroyer27 (User talk:Destroyer27) 8:08, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
- That's not an answer.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:21, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
- Then I'm afraid I didn't follow your question. I haven't made any edits under any other username, except the current one, since the moment I created it. Other than the usernames that you've specified above, I don't have any other username. I did create an account a year ago or so and was an editor for a quite few days, IIRC, and then joined back. I don't even remember that username, to be honest. As I said, I am quite a novice on WP. I simply don't know much about how it works. I will spend some more time to learn it, and I certainly will stay this time. Anyhow, I can assure you that I haven't indulged in any unscrupulous practice. Please unblock me! Regards,User:Destroyer27 (User talk:Destroyer27) 8:27, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
- That's not an answer.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:21, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
- Since the moment I created this account, absolutely not! User:Destroyer27 (User talk:Destroyer27) 8:08, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
I don't see why the block is any longer necessary when I have said that I haven't misused my other accounts. How can I use them, when I do not even know that they exist? Furthermore, since I am engaged currently in a content dispute, won't this cast a poor light in the eyes of the administrators who are mediating it? I have said quite plainly that I never had or have any ill-will, certainly not expressly. Also, I have apologized courteously, regardless of whether I had erred intentionally or inadvertently. So I really don't see why am I being still blocked. What more do you suggest me to do?
- I've changed this to a comment. You can't have more one unblock request open at the same time.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:12, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
Dear Bbb23,
I see. I didn't know that too. I am sorry. Maybe if had read the Wiki guidelines, this wouldn't have happened. Just give me some more time. Certainly, don't think it's unpardonable. As I said, it wasn't intentional at all, and as you know, I hadn't made any edit with any of my other accounts. Please forgive me!
Regards, Destroyer27 9:17, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
Oh yeah, that was the one! I hadn't used it at all since I logged out from it, about a year ago. Delete that too! I am awfully sorry. Again, I haven't made any edits with that account simultaneously while using another. Never, by my troth! In fact, at the time I just had that account, and then had utterly forgotten about it. Please unblock me. Destroyer27, (talk) 9:25, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
- These are my last comments. First, I don't believe that you forgot about the Sam Noam account. The only way I knew about it was because of something you did very recently that I prefer not to mention. Second, I am not going to unblock you. As far as I am concerned, you are a disruptive editor who has created multiple accounts, abandoning each one because you wanted to avoid scrutiny of your edits.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:15, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
A) All my edits have been scrutinized, as a matter of fact. If I indeed wanted to avoid scrutiny, why would I not use the "sock accounts" that I had created? If I hadn't forgotten about that account, and if I had any ill-will, I'd have used them, right?
B) Yes, I was being disruptive and disrespectful at some point in time for several reasons. I agree. But I no more am. And I have done nothing recently with that account. I just clicked on the link you provided. I'd created it 8 months ago, and made my final edit at just about the same time. By the way, you blocked me for creating sock accounts (that I haven't used), not for being disruptive. Now that you know it, why don't you unblock me?
I would, nevertheless, apologize and request you to offer me another chance.
Destroyer27 10:30, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
Despite the apology, if you really don't want me on Wikipedia, then I'd prefer you delete my account rather than blocking me. I promise I won't be back again.
Destroyer27 10:30, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
Dear Abecedare, I haven't been using WP since 8 months. As I said earlier, I logged out and never returned. And its been exactly about the same time since I made my last edit. Also, you claim that I've pleaded guilty only when confronted with undeniable evidence, but the fact is I wasn't simply aware of the existence of those accounts. And if indeed wanted to misuse them, I'd have. How can I familiarise myself with Wikipedia guidelines, when I have to engage in an editing dispute for the entire day, and then again deal with such issues? Anyhow, as I said, if you just don't want me on WP, delete my account. I wouldn't come back.Destroyer27 10:30, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
- Please see WP:VANISH, from which I quote,
...it is not possible to delete an account
. And given (a) your previous misuse of the process, and (b) the accounts not being associated with real-life identity, you are ineligible for another courtesy vanishing. To avoid any possible confusion, I'll be plain: just log out and walk-away, and don't edit wikipedia as an IP or through new accounts. - And to prevent this conversation from becoming interminable, I'll be refraining from responding further. Other admins are welcome to do so or to block talk-page access, as they see fit. Abecedare (talk) 23:16, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
Hmm. That was quite plain. It befits your user name. May be you should work at a Montessori. At least you'll make some money there. Thanks! Destroyer27 12:31, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
Bbb23, And you, keep your hairpiece on! Destroyer27 12:31, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
- Destroyer27, given that you have decided to taunt admins who discovered your three other accounts, I am removing your talk page access. If you want to try requesting another unblock, please use UTRS system. Liz Read! Talk! 03:11, 20 June 2019 (UTC)