User talk:Wikijos

June 2009[edit]

Welcome and thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test on the page Joseph Kaipayil worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment further, please use the sandbox instead. Thank you. Quaeler (talk) 19:55, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry case[edit]

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wikiwdos for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. Quaeler (talk) 20:00, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

July 2009[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Joseph Kaipayil, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ClueBot. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you believe there has been a mistake and would like to report a false positive, please report it here and then remove this warning from your talk page. If your edit was not vandalism, please feel free to make your edit again after reporting it. The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Joseph Kaipayil was changed by Wikijos (u) (t) blanking the page on 2009-07-23T02:31:09+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 02:31, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Joseph Kaipayil. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 02:36, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

December 2009[edit]

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits, such as those you made to Joseph Kaipayil. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, you will be blocked from editing. Woogee (talk) 02:11, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

March 2010[edit]

Your addition to Diplomate has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. かんぱい！ Scapler (talk) 14:45, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for repeated abuse of editing privileges. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.

The block is for the misuse of multiple accounts. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 15:14, 25 March 2010 (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).

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

Request reason:

I have one account only. A fried of mine had permitted me to use his, in case I needed (like forgetting the password or any log-in difficulty). I used that account in good faith. I admit it was a mistake. So please accept my apology and unlock my account. I know I should be careful in future.

Decline reason:

See below. –MuZemike 21:08, 4 April 2010 (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.

Which other account did you use? Sandstein 21:40, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:Wikiwdos —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikijos (talk • contribs) 20:58, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Since this a case of account-sharing, I cannot unblock this account. In order for me to consider having you continue to edit, you must do the following:

You agree to use one and only one account.
Since we have a case of possibly compromised accounts, you will need to choose a new username. Go to Special:ListUsers and see whatever username you choose is available or not. If it is available (i.e. whichever new username you want does not appear on that list), then respond below, along with a statement saying that you agree to use only one account.

If you agree to the above two conditions, then I'll allow to create a new account. –MuZemike 21:08, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I agree. I have a question too. Will I be able to use the new account to make a request for undeletion of an article I unintentionally deleted using my now blocked account? I had made an email request. But I did not get any reply. Thank you.

Speedy deletion nomination of National Board of Examinations[edit]

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 National Board of Examinations requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5UGIbEoFzLA. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

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 deleted 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. Hummerrocket (talk) 16:43, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ontologists has been nominated for deletion[edit]

Category:Ontologists has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. - car chasm (talk) 08:17, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]