Butterfly morpho
February 2021
edit
Hello, I'm Arccosecant. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Assassination of Rajiv Gandhi have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks. — csc-1 02:18, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Assassination of Rajiv Gandhi. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 03:34, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Utcursch. I noticed that you recently removed content from Nikhil without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. utcursch | talk 15:31, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
Welcome
edit
|
March 2021
edit
Hello Butterfly morpho! While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.
- 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. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
- We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. All other images must be made available under a free and open license that allows commercial and derivative reuse to be used on Wikipedia.
- If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
- 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 must follow the copyright attribution steps in Wikipedia:Translation#How to translate. See also 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. Please don't upload images that you find online. Generally, those images are copyrighted by someone. Calling them "on work" means you're taking credit for someone else's work which isn't right. Please don't do this anymore, you will probably end up blocked if you continue. Thank you. Ravensfire (talk) 20:33, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
One of your recent edits has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. You CANNOT upload someone else's work and claim it as "own work" - you're taking credit for what someone else has done. STOP. Any more and this will be taken to WP:ANI for review. Ravensfire (talk) 01:58, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
March 2021
edit Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Assassination of Rajiv Gandhi have been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.
- ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
- For help, take a look at the introduction.
- The following is the log entry regarding this message: Assassination of Rajiv Gandhi was changed by Butterfly morpho (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.953426 on 2021-03-15T01:16:59+00:00
Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 01:17, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did with this edit to Assassination of Rajiv Gandhi. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. ArglebargleIV (talk) 01:20, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. -- LuK3 (Talk) 02:04, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
Butterfly morpho (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
hello there, i am just starting to become interested in editing again and im very sorry for my past mistakes and have learnt from them, as you can see in my history I have made no such edits as of 2023. My other account, butterfly editing is also not a sockpuppet but rather an account i made when i became interested in editing again Butterfly morpho (talk) 06:38, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
Decline reason:
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.
- Butterfly editing (talk · contribs · count · logs · page moves · block log · edit summaries)
Butterfly morpho (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
hello dear, I have realised that I have committed Sockpuppetry without realising, and have read the article thoroughly on what it is, I am very sorry if it has caused any inconvenience and I never meant it for malicious intent. Please unblock my account as I am interested at making contributions to Wikipedia and being a part of the community Butterfly morpho (talk) 20:32, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Duplicate request. Please place new posts below older posts. 331dot (talk) 06:11, 6 October 2024 (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.
Butterfly morpho (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I have sent another request but this one has been made in accordance to the rules about unblock request on wikipedia, I was blocked for sockpuppetry, and I now fully understand why that was a violation. At the time, I didn’t realize that using multiple accounts was against Wikipedia’s policies, but after taking the time to review the guidelines, I see the issue and why it’s important to follow these rules. I was originally blocked years ago for vandalism, and I regret those actions. I’ve learned from these experiences and would like the chance to contribute positively now that I understand the expectations. I am committed to making constructive and rule-abiding edits going forward.Butterfly morpho (talk) 09:31, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I think you've probably addressed the sockpuppetry issue, but you need to address the stated reason for the block, disruptive editing, by telling us what was wrong with your edits. 331dot (talk) 06:14, 6 October 2024 (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.
6 October 2024 unblock request
edit Butterfly morpho (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I was blocked for sockpuppetry, and I now understand why that was wrong. At the time, I didn’t realize using multiple accounts went against Wikipedia’s policies, but after reviewing the guidelines, I get why it’s important to follow the rules. I was also blocked for disruptive editing, and I can see now how my edits came across as unhelpful and disruptive to the content. I didn’t fully understand how they affected the project, but I’ve learned from this. I was originally blocked years ago for vandalism, and I regret those actions. I’m ready to follow the guidelines and contribute constructively from now on. Butterfly morpho (talk) 21:38, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
Decline reason:
This is nearly identical to the prior request. You need to explain why your prior edits were disruptive in order for us to be able to confirm that you understand what the problem was and that you not only intend but know how to do better. It is also helpful if you indicate what sorts of edits (topics, types of editing work, etc.) you intend to do if unblocked. signed, Rosguill talk 18:28, 30 October 2024 (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.