Taurgo

January 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates from Sarsawa Air Base. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Favonian (talk) 13:14, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Qsys

A tag has been placed on Qsys requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for organizations and companies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. noq (talk) 18:14, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

India quick links

utcursch | talk 06:55, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

With proper sources

Mr.Taurgo, you please always ensure that whenever you make edits, you do it with proper sources. That will be very helpful. Thanking you.Bcs09 (talk) 04:26, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

September 2011

{{unblock-ip|1=167.219.48.10|2=[[WP:Block#Evasion of blocks|Block evasion]]: Sockpuppet of [[Special:Contributions/Chanakyathegreat|Chanakyathegreat]]|3=Atama}}

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I have been blocked as a sock puppet of Chanakyathegreat. However, let me ssure you, that I am the sole user of the id "Taurgo" and I am not using any other user id to create or edit any article on wikipedia. I do not have anything to do with the id "Chanakyathegreat". Some of the articles where I have heavily contributed are - Green Water Navy, INS Chakra, Nerpa Submarine etc. I would request you to kindly unblock my user id "Taurgo". Thanks.

Decline reason:

Appeal retracted by user (see below), also  Confirmed by checkuser. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:26, 11 October 2011 (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.

• If you are not Chanakyathegreat, perhaps you would like to give a really convincing explanation as to why your edits appear to mirror his? Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 21:10, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

• My major edits have been on blue-water navy and green-water navy articles. Apart from that you will not find any major edits from me targeted on any other article. On blue-water navy, I have been emphasising that Royal Navy should be put as Navy which had blue-water capabilities but have now diminished capabilities because of lack of carrier-aviation. For green-water navy, there were lots of edits in which russian navy and indian navy were deleted, so I edited the article for that. I am pretty sure that other than than these two articles you will not find any major edits from my account. Further, I have not followed "chanakyathegreat", if he has contributed or made any updates on the two articles, as I mentioned above, then he followed me there, I did not. Leaving the decision to your discretion. Thanks.

• I'd like to hear a really, really convincing reason how you know nothing about Chanakyathegreat when you've been using the same computer as a series of other accounts, also blocked as sockpuppets of that user. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:39, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

• Hi Hersfold, Anthony Bradbury and Atama. I no longer wish to get my account unblocked. I understand that you have the authority to block accounts, and you have exercised that. However, I do not have anything to do with "Chanakyathegreat".

I am sure that I am not a sock-puppet on any other user, my id "Taurgo" has been solely used by me, and one of my article on "INS Chakra", since been re-directed to "Russian submarine K-152 Nerpa", has been marked as one of the good article out of 12,963 good articles on wikipedia, as of today. I am leaving wikipedia now and I will not be creating any other user id at all. It does not make sense to be associated with a community where people-in-administration can not differentiate between right and wrong. So, I myself quit from wikipedia, I am sure that your "blocking" of my user id, will be helpless to prevent that at least.

Signing Off -

Taurgo.

I am on the subnet of a network and there are thousands of people in my office, who will be using the same proxy server. So today, I became a sock puppet of someone by the user-id "Skonduri" as well (refer the information below). So you can very well also block me for any violation that has been committed by "Skonduri".

I have just seen this on my talk page -

---

You are currently unable to edit pages on Wikipedia due to an autoblock affecting your IP address. This is because someone using this internet address or shared proxy server was blocked. The ability of all users on this IP address to edit pages has been automatically suspended to prevent abuse by the blocked party. Innocent users are sometimes caught in an autoblock. It may be the case that you have done nothing wrong.

A user of this IP address was blocked by HelloAnnyong for the following reason (see our blocking policy):

Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "Skonduri". The reason given for Skonduri's block is: "Abusing multiple accounts: This block has been set to expire: 05:42, 12 October 2011.

Note that you have not been blocked from editing directly. Most likely your computer is on a shared network with other people.

---

Not my sock id

I noticed that many ids that i did not created has been linked to me. This is pure stupidity and shows racism and bias in Wikipedia. It shows how one can be blocked by claiming to be a sock, then if they create another account for editiing, they can be again blocked. The reason for the first blocked may be as simple as claiming that Britain is no longer a great power or Royal navy not a blue water navy. Such is the racism in Wikipedia.Groupsets (talk) 03:42, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

I know Groupsets, initially I was so upset about this arrogant behaviour of wikipedia moderators, then I smiled on their stupidity and since then has quit wikipedia. Since, then I have joined another defence blogs and now I am connecting with the defence community in a lot better way. Have a pleasant day. Take care. - Taurgo — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.167.74.119 (talk) 16:28, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I have been blocked for more than an year now, with no fault of mine. Is anyone out there to please listen to me and revoke this block. I have got my blog up and running as I vowed, activedefence.blogspot.com but every now and then there are some other areas I wish to add articles on like dying rivers of North India which are not yet on wiki. So, just wanted to check if there is some sensible administator out there, who understands about network, subnets etc. and just not on a blocking spree marking people as sockpuppets without even understanding the problem. Taurgo (talk) 23:18, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Decline reason:

As I am a big fan of second chances, you almost had me until the "with no fault of mine". I understand subnets, thanks for much, and if you believe that checkusers uses only IP address to tell, you're very sadly mistaken. I also understand multiple editors making almost the same edits from identically-configured computers with the same IP's. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 11:04, 15 November 2012 (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.

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

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

---

UTRS appeal #24036 was submitted on Feb 22, 2019 07:40:08. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 07:40, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

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).

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

---

Request reason:

Greetings, hope this message finds you well. My user id "taurgo" was blocked in 2011, I pleaded moderators to review my block but they said that my account has been found to be a sock-puppet of some other accounts. I had no idea about sock-puppet thing, and I shared whatever limited information I could provide since I am not a technology person. I was accessing Wikipedia from my workplace since we had very limited Internet connectivity in the region in 2011. There were thousands of people on our workplace network, who were using the same IP range. Wikipedia has helped me to learn a lot and I am sure there are billions of people just like me across the globe who have benefited from it. I am pleading my innocence once again after eight years. I have been an yearly contributor to Wikipedia and highly appreciate the impact Wikipedia has brought to the life of so many people like me. It is just sad to see that my account is lying blocked out there. Hope, after these 8 years, somebody would look into my block and review my case. I sincerely appreciate your consideration. Have a nice day ahead. Thank you.

Decline reason:

It's quite a coincidence that your behaviour would be so similar to that of Chanakyathegreat that you got blocked on behavioural grounds, and then it turns out that they're your coworker, too. The world is a small place, but not that small. Huon (talk) 19:21, 1 March 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.

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).

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

---

Request reason:

Hi Huon/Moderator, thank you for your note. I agree with you completely, and I am also saying the same thing it would have been some co-worker for sure, because I did not had Internet access at home in 2011, and our workplace had thousands of employees, everyone connected to same company network. Please trust me I have no idea about Chanakyathegreat. He or she could be someone from the same building even, but please trust me I never knew that person. As you mentioned about the coincidence on behavior thing, I don't have any quantitative proof to prove my innocence but you/other-moderators would have noticed that I contributed to very limited articles on Wikipedia and almost all of them (if not all) were on Navy, just a handful. Also, please consider this, it is the only id that I have for Wikipedia, I don't have any other id, and I am still trying to get it unblocked after all these years. Let me request you this, could my account be unlocked temporarily something like probation, and if it is observed that my account is still showing the same pattern then please block me. I am not employed at that workplace anymore, not even the same state, and it has been 8 years. I left that firm in year 2012, it is 2019 now. I humbly request you to please consider these facts and advise. I appreciate your help. Taurgo (talk) 20:44, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only; this request has been open for two weeks but has not been sufficiently persuasive enough to have an administrator take action. You are free to make a new request if it is different from this one. 331dot (talk) 11:04, 16 March 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.