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).

Milkmen437 (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

as i did some change in laxmi chand tyagi page because my prime account Niveditadhi was not doing it, so revive those changes and then let Niveditadhi do the changes in Grameen Vikas Vigyan samiti, Laxmi chand tyagi and prakash tyagi page

Decline reason:

This does not address the reason you were blocked, which is that you were abusively using multiple accounts. Yamla (talk) 11:20, 28 July 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.

Allow Niveditadhi to edit Laxmi Chand Tyagi Page and Prakash Tyagi Page and Gramin Vikas Vigyan Samiti Page Milkmen437 (talk) 05:36, 2 August 2016 (UTC) Milkmen437Reply

August 2016 edit

  You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Laxmi Chand Tyagi.

You have been told before that you should not use Wikipedia for promotional purposes and that your repeated reinstatement of material at the Laxmi Chand Tyagi article is in fact doing that because the guy is not notable and the sources are not independent. I think you need either to gain some experience here by editing articles other than those related to the "GRAVIS" NGO or you need to find some other outlet on the web for your interests. Any more of this and you are likely to be indefinitely blocked. Sitush (talk) 04:12, 6 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

 
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistent disruptive editing, which you resumed as soon as your previous block expired. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block 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 ~~~~}}.  Bishonen | talk 16:07, 6 August 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).

Milkmen437 (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

Laxmi Chand Tyagi & Praksh Tyagi are official pages of my organization Gramin Vikas Vigyan Samiti webpage on wikipedia. In future I have to deal with them only on wikipedia. I will not be creating any damage to any other document on wikipedia as of now or in future. So unblock me for the same reason. Please.

Decline reason:

No, organizations do not have official pages here, they only have articles about them written by disinterested writers - and such articles are not maintained by the organizations themselves. Wikipedia's conflict of interest policy is important here (see WP:COI), which essentially says that you should not directly edit articles about your organization (you may request changes on their talk pages), and that you should declare your conflict of interest. Please read the WP:COI policy page and then feel free to make a new unblock request explaining what you will do if unblocked. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:09, 9 August 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.

I had an edit conflict here, but what I was going to say exactly matches the answer above from Boing! said Zebedee. Peridon (talk) 09:14, 9 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

Note socking --NeilN talk to me 09:47, 12 August 2016 (UTC)Reply