User talk:Samdeepsinghone

Problems with upload of File:Mr. Punjab.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Mr. Punjab.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 15:05, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Mandhir Singh (Chahal)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Mandhir Singh (Chahal), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. GSS (talk) 11:46, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted the article, because it adds nothing to the one that was previously deleted. I am copy pasting here the conversation that took place in its talk page, just in case you and User:GSS-1987 want to have it (for reference, to carry on, ...) -- Nabla (talk) 15:35, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

begin of moved section

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedily deleted because... (Thank you for pointing out the errors in the content of this article which I have tried to contribute on Wikipedia. But under the category which you have chosen i.e. it has to deleted because it contains content of the one of the previous deleted articles and also some other reasons. I have read those discussions and found them correct till some extent as all sources provided over those deleted articles were of social media and other medias. Even being a new editor on Wikipedia, i was known to its requirements required for creating a article. At that time, even the article for PTC Punjabi Mr. Punjab was not there. I tried contributing about it also and then I came on the contestants. And more on this article, I have found news for whatever was said for the article and tried to cited them all. And even if you find any error specifically, please point out them so that I can get time to improve on it as it asserts to be on Wikipedia. Your contribution will be immense for me, my experience over editing and contributing on Wikipedia and for this article also. And I would love if you help people like me, people who are new on Wikipedia and putting their efforts to contribute to Wikipedia to correct our mistakes, which you are doing, in a more polite way. ) -- Samdeepsinghone (talk) 14:52, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Samdeepsinghone: The article still fails to pass WP:GNG and WP:BIO there is no evidence of notability, also as mentioned in the AfD by General Ization that Mr. Punjab contest itself is not notable at the English Wikipedia. GSS (talk) 15:36, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@GSS-1987: Thank you for your gesture to point out the points of error. The thing which you have mentioned of General Ization regarding PTC Punjabi Mr.Punjab was made on date 13 March 2016 and at that time the principle network of this Punjabi Reality Television, which is PTC Punjabi was not having solid hold over the media and some notable sources for the show. That was why no article was made on it. And i tried to contribute for an article on the same subject on date 23 September 2016 because till that time the third season for this Punjabi Reality Television Show was announced and it was having a strong hold on notable sources and media. And further tried to work upon its contestants

Samdeepsinghone (talk) 19:57, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

end of moved section - Nabla (talk) 15:35, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet of AwardPunjabi (talk · contribs · global contribs · page moves · user creation · block log) that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text below. —SpacemanSpiff 04:10, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

I can not even get how I am related to this user whose name is awardpunjabi, whom i have ever not even known before this investigation, and i would like to know on what basis/reasons I was blocked. I think there was no same editing pattern, no same interest was there, no same language pattern, no same editing style, no same time ranges for editing, no contact to each other usernames/accounts, no same Ips addresses, nothing; then how and on which reasons my account was blocked ? I am a real person who is enjoying his life and i love to contribute to Wikipedia because I just simply feel happy and contented by contributing to Wikipedia. And i also love to be with same username on whichever site i use and also the proof is below. I don't even have a second account on any other site, then why would I have to use a second one on wikipedia. Check the ip of awardpunjabi and then mine and then check the start of use of wikipedia on my ip and then awardpunjabi one's. You will have the difference over there only. I love to be on this site and contribute to it with my little earnest efforts. Please let me do so. Even if you want to see my personal profiles on micro blogging sites, these are as... (Redacted) Just to add on more, there is always a similarity in my usernames on all the sites which I use and till now, i am using facebook, instagram, twitter, snapchat and Wikipedia also. so here is my explanation to unblock me ! Thanks Samdeepsinghone (talk) 10:00, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I won't be going into all the details surrounding your block. That information has been available at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/AwardPunjabi. I can say the largest contributing factor to this determination was the creation of the article Mandhir Singh (Chahal). It shares a striking similarity to the deleted articles Mandhir Singh and Mandhir Singh Chahal. The fixation on this obscure individual in such a close proximity to a well documented sock farm demonstrates a pattern connecting the accounts together. There were suspicions of undisclosed paid editing due to the similar promotional nature of the article and the fact that the individual does not even remotely meet our guidelines for WP:BLP in terms of WP:RS and WP:SIGCOV. Lastly, it's important to note that sock puppetry also covers meat puppetry -- whereby you may not be the same individual but working in association or connect with the other accounts. Mkdw ^talk 18:28, 17 October 2016 (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.

Nomination of Mandhir Singh (Chahal) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mandhir Singh (Chahal) 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/Mandhir Singh (Chahal) until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. -- RoySmith (talk) 17:32, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your valuable time RoySmith, but as you can see that I was blocked without any proper explanation in the subject of being a sockpuppet of awardpunjabi. I have also given a proper explanation here on my talk page for that, but it is taking longer time than expected for my appeal to be considered. Please see to it also and help me so that I can again come and contribute to Wikipedia. Because of this only, I won't be able to say my opinion on the above afd as well as contribute to the article in the afd and other articles also for their betterments. Hope that you can take some quick action and let my appeal for unblock to be considered earlier and sooner so that I can also edit and put my earnest efforts to contribute to Wikipedia. Hoping for your quick action. Once again, thank you. Samdeepsinghone (talk) 19:49, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Explanation For Suspected Sockpuppet Investigations

GSS quoted here "This user added surname in brackets and I don't think any new user do that rather than naming it simple." For this I will say that as I have already mentioned here that I wrote first about the PTC Punjabi Mr. Punjab and then came on the context of winners of this show. And for quotation here about editing the article, Giddarbaha, I would say that I did it because when it is not done, the article gets into orphan tag after sometime. I learnt this thing while creating article Harp Farmer. I created that article on 19 July 2016 and it got a orphan tag on 24 August 2016. As it was new for me, I read about it. I understood it what it means. Then I came to know that I have to link the related articles with every article created. So for this reason I did these edits on the article Giddarbaha. For your statement that awardpunjabi made edits on wikinews also, I cannot find one here. And for your statement for irregular punctuation, I would say that the sources which you have given here, here, here, here. In the first one, it contains explanation of about nearly 5,000 bytes and because I am new on Wikipedia, I am not that used till now to write consistently this much long following a same pattern, sometimes it gets irregular. I said sometimes because you can see in second, third, fourth source; the irregularity is much more prominent than compared to my writing style. I have already given a proper explanation of the reason to unblock me from this block. Thank you Samdeepsinghone (talk) 09:34, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I can not find anywhere you mention about the article title and also the master has made 24 edits on enwikinews and all of them were deleted. Yes your explanation here contains nearly 5,000 bytes as you said above but irregular punctuation happend at around 115 bytes not only at this discussion you also repeated this here as well also it seems like you are well aware of how check user works and you tried to avoid each and every possible thing to survive from CU as per your message above where you said, "I think there was no same editing pattern, no same interest was there, no same language pattern, no same editing style, no same time ranges for editing, no contact to each other usernames/accounts, no same Ips addresses, nothing; then how and on which reasons my account was blocked?". and "Check the ip of awardpunjabi and then mine and then check the start of use of wikipedia on my ip and then awardpunjabi one's". GSS (talk) 15:57, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply GSS (talk). But how could you decide whether I have written those 115 bytes just in the starting of the writing. I have wrote those in the end during briefing up and summarizing the reason and about the second source which you provided, I cannot distinguish a irregular punctuation mark as it was a mistake made by me as I have never gone through a block explanation. I made unblock request at a wrong place, nothing else. And about the thing you are saying to me for knowing all the things, I have a explanation for it. I came to know about this sockpuppet and related terms when I was mentioned by you on the investigation page on 4 october 2016. I just read it over some and left it not considering it something important as it was the first time i have gone into. But then i got a notification of block on 12 October 2016. At that very time, I came to know about the importance of these investigations and their working module. As it was all new for me I tried to read everything and opened every link I could have. From the investigation page, i went here and then exploring every link in the progress, i went here and then here. So that's how i learnt these things, not the thing which you quoted that i was aware of these things earlier. Thank you. Samdeepsinghone (talk) 17:05, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Explanation For Nomination of Mandhir Singh (Chahal) for deletion

RoySmith (talk), thank you once again for your earnest efforts for putting up a afd on this article. But I cannot take part in the contest as I have been blocked. Please see to it as i want to contribute to Wikipedia as well as want to take part in contest also. I also want to add on in the article for its betterment. I have already appealed for a unblock. As I said earlier also, it is longer time than expected. Please see to it. Samdeepsinghone (talk) 15:22, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A Request For Help

Hello, RHaworth (talk, I have seen that you have deleted the article PTC Punjabi Mr. Punjab just few minutes ago under the reason that it was created by a blocked and banned user AwardPunjabi under a violation. But I want to inform that I have created that article. Along with a request to undelete that article, i also want your help in getting my request for unblock to be reviewed soon, as I am suspected as a sockpuppet of awardpunjabi , for which I have given explanations and reasons everywhere. I have appealed also. I think one admin has also relieved me here. You can check my talk page above for better explanation of my reason to unblock. I am a new user on Wikipedia and want to contribute with my earnest efforts towards it. The suspection is resulting in block which is not letting me to do so. So I need a help. Thank you Samdeepsinghone (talk) 20:13, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I do not get involved in unblock operations. There does appear to be a backlog in this area but I do not know how to expidite your application. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 16:53, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Request

Hello, Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡), Mkdw ^talk, please check my unblock request which I have posted above on my talk page. I am a new user on Wikipedia and want to contribute to it with my earnest. I am saying it all with my heart that I am not at all related to this user awardpunjabi. Please see to it. Thank you. Samdeepsinghone (talk) 17:51, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to decline any unblock. You share far too much in common with the other editor, to the point where if this is not sockpuppetry (you are the same person) then it's certainly meatpuppetry (AwardPunjabi hired or otherwise asked you to make the same edits on their behalf in order to evade the block). My answer is a no. To be honest, it looks extremely unlikely that you will be unblocked, to the point where I wouldn't have a problem with SpacemanSpiff (or Bbb23 or Mkdw since they participated in the SPI) revoking talk page access. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:35, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Mr. Punjab.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Mr. Punjab.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) 18:42, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

As a new user, I once again want to edit for Wikipedia. Please unblock me, Give me a fair chance for doing so. Be kind and polite to new users. Strikeness of information and article was only based on the geographical locations of all the other accounts. Nothing else. Thanks. Samdeepsinghone (talk) 12:24, 18 November 2016 (UTC))[reply]

Decline reason:

It is not the case that the block is based solely on geographical locations of the other accounts. In fact, in this case, the block isn't based on that at all, but rather on the extreme similarity of the edits. You are welcome to request another unblock review if you wish to address the similar edits. Yamla (talk) 15:58, 21 November 2016 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

Thank you for your reply Yamla (talk). For the thing which you said above in the request that there is similarity between edits, I can say that I have also made edits on other Wikipedia articles like Harp Farmer,PTC Punjabi Mr. Punjab etc but where as, usually the accounts of those of Awardpunjabi were only made for editing on a single subject. And for edits like Gurdaspur article edit, I have already explained it very clearly in the above discussion. Just seeing on a few, hardly two maximum does not strike the similarity of a person with another one. Just to quote a few, if you just see the accounts of awardpunjabi, the first thing is that they are usually made for editing on a single subject, the second thing i would like to quote is that their writing style and the style of grammar and type of vocabulary used is very different from me. They have somewhere simply used the calling slangs, the way of their explanation is entirely different. For an instance, i always try to give a detailed explanation where as those accounts doesn't seems to be doing this. I always try to use proper language and vocabulary and writing style during explanations where as these things cannot be seen in those accounts. So where are these differences to be counted on then ? I just have this much to say right now. And I am only doing this because i love to contribute to Wikipedia with my all little earnest efforts. Thank you Samdeepsinghone (talk) 02:17, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

The behavioral similarities are extremely significant, to the point that if this is not sockpuppetry, it is certainly meatpuppetry. I did some digging, and there's additional reason to believe this account is a sock above and beyond what was presented at the SPI. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 13:45, 22 December 2016 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

I have already said many times that I am not at all related to any of the Wikipedia editor/contributor named here, whether it is awardpunjabi or any one. Even if we see, I was blocked at that time and so I am now, which simply lead to that I was not able to defend myself properly. Whatever it was, I seriously want to contribute to Wikipedia and work on suggested and deserving articles. That is why I am here to appeal again. Please help me in contributing to Wikipedia by unblocking me. Thank you. Samdeepsinghone (talk) 08:52, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Besides "it wasn't me" there is nothing in this unblock request. A "proper" defense could have been made on this talk page; a block does not prevent that. Given the comments by a variety of admins I don't see how that would make a difference--and we are not given any reason to see a difference, given there lack of a defense. Drmies (talk) 20:11, 21 June 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.