User talk:Dr2Rao

Hi, this is my discussion page. Do not hesitate to leave a message for me. Old messages are eventually archived.

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis }}
 * archiveprefix=User talk: Dr2Rao/Archives/
 * format=Y/F
 * age=2160
 * minarchthreads=0
 * minkeepthreads=6
 * archivenow= {{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}},{{resolved|,{{Resolved|,{{done}},{{Done}}
 * header= {{Talkarchive}}
 * headerlevel=2
 * nogenerateindex=0
 * maxkeepthreads=6
 * maxkeepbytes=0
 * maxarchsize=150000
 * numberstart=1
 * archivebox=yes
 * box-advert=yes

Notice that you are now subject to an arbitration enforcement topic ban
Please can the above topic ban also be applied to Souniel Yadav, since Dr2Rao was merely a sockpuppet of Souniel Yadav. It is possible that in a year or two, Souniel Yadav will apply for the standard offer and be unblocked. The topic ban should still apply to him/her. -- Toddy1 (talk) 08:21, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I'll reply on your page. Bishonen &#124; tålk 14:19, 22 September 2020 (UTC).

September 2020
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Immigration to Sweden, you may be blocked from editing. bonadea contributions talk 17:43, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Blocked
I see you added "the 2020 Sweden riots" to Immigration to Sweden, sourced to media from 2016 and 2017, or perhaps not sourced at all; your edit is unclear concerning what sources it invokes, but none of them are current enough to source 2020 events. And this after Bonadea warned you about the same thing above, and reverted you with an explanatory edit summary. You have been blocked for 31 hours for persistent disruptive editing. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bishonen &#124; tålk 18:18, 8 September 2020 (UTC).


 * Dr2Rao, there are no sources that could support your claim in the article, and it is not a claim that would belong in that article anyway, so please do not insert it again once your block is lifted. There have apparently been concerted attempts to make it seem as if the Malmö riots were instigated by Muslim immigrants, but there are no reliable sources supporting this (after all, it started with supporters of a far-right activist protesting the fact that he was not allowed into the country, and acting on purpose to try to stir up religious strife), and there can be no possible reason to add unverified speculations about one specific incident to an article designed to cover immigration as a general phenomenon. If nothing else, WP:UNDUE applies.


 * It would probably be a very good idea for you to edit only articles that have no connection at all to religion, ethnicity, or nationalism, of any flavour, for some considerable time. Just my advice as a fellow editor. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 20:23, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
 * To all my talk page stalkers, if I am right, I have to cite references that say exactly what my sentence says, it is not which article I edit, right?&mdash;Dr2Rao (talk) 07:10, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
 * It is much more complicated than that:
 * You have restrictions on what articles you are allowed to edit. (Your topic ban.)
 * You need to actually read the sources you are citing, so you know what they say.
 * You need to write from a neutral point of view, which means representing without editorial bias, what the source actually says on the topic of the Wikipedia article.
 * When selecting sources for an article, you must do so from a neutral point of view, which means representing fairly and proportionately all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic.
 * You need to put the citations in as you write. If this is hard for you, use a user sandbox (such as User:Dr2Rao/Sandbox 01) to develop new versions of article paragraphs before pasting the paragraphs into articles.
 * You need to obey rules on copyright.
 * -- Toddy1 (talk) 07:36, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks .&mdash;Dr2Rao (talk) 15:54, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Archiving
I want to keep the last 3 threads and archive the rest of this talk page. I tried and failed. Please help me.&mdash;Dr2Rao (talk) 15:09, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
 * You've only just (in the last hour) placed the archival template, but the archive bot only runs once a day (I believe it's at some point overnight). Please be patient, though obviously if it's still not working by tomorrow feel free to restore the help me template above and someone will give you a hand. Primefac (talk) 15:23, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks .&mdash;Dr2Rao (talk) 17:30, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , am I supposed to remove the and  wherever I have put them at the top of this page?&mdash;Dr2Rao (talk) 18:05, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Not sure what you're referring to, but you generally don't have to remove anything in order to have a page archived. Primefac (talk) 18:28, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks, it worked!&mdash;Dr2Rao (talk) 08:03, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Glad to hear it! Primefac (talk) 15:18, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Tendentious editing: final warning
Dr2Rao, these edits of yours changed neutral wording to emotional, non-neutral, wording. I can't find that your text is copied from within the article either, as you claim. Your anti-muslim editing is becoming very disruptive. This is a final warning. If you can't or won't edit any topic without disrupting it, it's getting to be time for an indefinite block. It's a pity you didn't listen to Bonadea's good advice here. Bishonen &#124; tålk 20:55, 20 September 2020 (UTC).
 * I have copied the citations from where I got the sentences now, please take a look, they do say that.&mdash;Dr2Rao (talk) 02:33, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Did you actually read the sources you cited this time? VR talk 02:39, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, I did.&mdash;Dr2Rao (talk) 02:50, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Really? Ok, then post the quotes from both of the sources you used in this edit. I checked Ali page 51 and it doesn't talk about this at all. So I'd be curious to what you were able to find.
 * And Saad page 243 says "Unlike the number of legal wives, who were limited to four only (4:2) there was no legal limit to the number of concubines."
 * This roughly corresponds to what the wikipedia article originally said: "Men were permitted to have as many concubines as they could afford" was what the source said. You changed it to: "Islam permits men to have sexual intercourse with these kidnapped sex slaves", which is not supported by the source. And now you're putting citations on it to make it seem like it is.VR talk 02:53, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
 * The full sentence I added was, Islam permits men to have sexual intercourse with these kidnapped sex slaves and there is no limit on the number they could keep.&mdash;Dr2Rao (talk) 03:55, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Kecia Ali says, A free man may marry four free women and female slaves, not more and he may take as many concubines as he wishes from among his female slaves. If a man has four free [wives] and a thousand concubines and wants to buy another [concubine] and a man reproaches him for that, it will be as if [that man] had committed unbelief. And if a man wants to take a concubine and his wife says to him "I will kill myself", he is not prohibited [from doing so], because it is a lawful act, but if he abbtains to save her grief, he will be rewarded, because of the hadith "Whoever sympathizes with my community,God will sympathize with him." Muhammad Ala al-Din Haskafi, seventeenth century Hanafi jurist, Al-Durr al-Mukhtar and The status of concubine was informal, however; law and custom allowed a master to have sex with any of his (unmarried) female slaves. The "these kidnapped" was added due to the second sentence of that paragraph.&mdash;Dr2Rao (talk) 04:20, 21 September 2020 (UTC)


 * What nonsense, Dr2Rao. You're just trying to obfuscate. I was not complaining about this edit, where you did copy a reference; that was all right. But in these edits you added text only, in both cases with the edit summary "Copied from further below". Was that true? A search fails to find it, and I don't believe it. Bishonen &#124; tålk 09:20, 21 September 2020 (UTC).
 * , this reference and the sentence preceding it is copied from further below - please do a "search" or "find in page", you will find it. These references and the sentence preceding it are also found further below although I have changed it a bit - I added the sentence Islam permits men to have sexual intercourse with these kidnapped sex slaves and there is no limit on the number they could keep and the sentence found further below (which I read and changed) was Islam permits men to have sexual intercourse with them and there is no limit on the number of concubines they could keep, unlike in polygamy where there is a limit of four wives which is almost the same.&mdash;Dr2Rao (talk) 11:16, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I shortened, allowed a master to have sex with any of his (unmarried) female slaves from the source to sex slaves.&mdash;Dr2Rao (talk) 11:21, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
 * It is not the same. The difference between them is exactly what I'm criticizing: it's the difference between the original, neutral, wording and your emotional, non-neutral wording. If you think it's "almost the same", why would you even change it — why bother? OK, now I've explained my warning to you three times, I'm not going to do it again, I'm done. Bishonen &#124; tålk 11:28, 21 September 2020 (UTC).
 * , I expanded "them" to "sex slaves" because, "them" would not have made sense [besides the source says allowed a master to have sex with any of his (unmarried) female slaves]. That's all.&mdash;Dr2Rao (talk) 11:35, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

September 2020
You have been blocked from editing for a period of Indefinite for Long term WP:TE, after being alerted to policy violations with a final warning, indulging in passive aggressive edit summaries. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  02:58, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

, I copied that because I didn't know how to draft an unblock request. Can I apply for adoption?&mdash;Dr2Rao (talk) 06:09, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
 * There were other similarities noted in the report filed at . You're able to file another unblock request, but it would need to adequately address both the long-term tendentious editing that had blocked you for, and the sockpuppetry that I had re-blocked you for. If you currently have access to the  account, an unblock request would need to be made from that account. —  Newslinger   talk   06:47, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , I am not Souniel Yadav. Can I be adopted for training and apply for getting unblocked after that?&mdash;Dr2Rao (talk) 07:58, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Some administrators may accept an unblock request on the condition that the unblocked editor is adopted by a mentor. If you are able to convince another administrator that you are not Souniel Yadav, then yes, you can propose mentorship as part of the unblocking agreement. —  Newslinger  talk   08:21, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , you closed the SPI against me, so please remove what you posted on my user page here as well (I am not Souniel Yadav and if you want, I can reveal my real identity to you). How should I draw the attention of an admin to adopt me?&mdash;Dr2Rao (talk) 11:22, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, I am not convinced by your explanation. I find it hard to believe that a rational editor would copy an unblock request written by someone they were listed under a sockpuppet investigation with, especially when that original request was declined. You would also need to explain the other similarities brought up in the investigation. For example, why did both you and (a suspected sockpuppet of Souniel Yadav) post substantially similar messages in Hindi on User talk:Chambailpankaj?
 * Special:Diff/960750191:, पंकज जी, आप सोनिया गांधी की "ओरिजिनल" नाम, विकिपीडिया पर डालने की कोशिश कर रहे थे। आप कृपया यहां जा कर, "सपोर्ट" डाल सकते हैं। धन्यवाद। -Dr2Rao (talk) 18:12, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Translation:, Pankaj ji, you were trying to put Sonia Gandhi's "original" name on Wikipedia. You can go here and enter "Support". Thank you. -Dr2Rao (talk) 18:12, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Special:Diff/954561472:, पंकज जी, मेरा अकाउंट अभी ऑटो-कनफर्म नही हुआ है, इसी लिए मै आप से सहायता मांग रहा हूं। मेरी अंग्रेज़ी अच्छी नहीं है इसी लिए हिंदी में लिख रहा हूं। आप सोनिया गांधी की "ओरिजिनल" नाम, विकिपीडिया पर डालने की कोशिश कर रहे थे। आप कृपया इन पुस्तकों का उल्लेखन दे कर उस नाम को वहां डाल सकते हैं। मैंने जो यहां लिखा है, उसे भी वहां, सोनिया जी के लेखन में लिखिए। धन्यवाद। Venue9 (talk) 02:49, 3 May 2020 (UTC)}}
 * Translation:, Pankaj ji, my account is not autoconfirmed yet, that is why I am asking for help from you. My English is not good, that is why I am writing in Hindi. You were trying to put Sonia Gandhi's "original" name on Wikipedia. You can put that name there by mentioning these books. Write what I have written here as well, in Soniaji's writing. Thank you. Venue9 (talk) 02:49, 3 May 2020 (UTC)}}
 * Providing personal identification would not be helpful here, since I do not know Souniel Yadav's identity and I have no way of authenticating whether the identification actually belongs to you. Please note that the sockpuppetry policy prohibits more than just improperly using multiple accounts; it also prohibits meatpuppetry, which includes actions resulting from individuals "enlisting assistance off-Wiki". WP:MEAT states: "A new user who engages in the same behavior as another user in the same context, and who appears to be editing Wikipedia solely for that purpose, may be subject to the remedies applied to the user whose behavior they are joining. Sanctions have been applied to editors of longer standing who have not, in the opinion of Wikipedia's administrative bodies, consistently exercised independent judgment." You can request that your block be reviewed by another administrator by filing another unblock request with the unblock template. You can mention that you are interested in mentorship in the unblock request, but you must be able to convince an administrator that you have not engaged in sockpuppetry for any type of unblock (including one with a mentorship requirement) to be considered from this account. Based on the behavioral evidence, I think the chance of an unblock being granted is low, but the decision lies with the next reviewing administrator. —  Newslinger  talk   22:30, 22 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Not going to handle the request myself, obviously, but your assertion that you deeply regret the above doesn't carry much weight when you were defending it and refusing to accept any wrongdoing shortly before the block, and you still haven't identified what you were doing wrong. Vanamonde (Talk) 15:53, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I expanded the "them" in that edit and since  did not accept it, I left it as unacceptable to wikipedia. I will be extra careful in future.&mdash;Dr2Rao (talk) 17:55, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

,, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , I have just one appeal left for getting myself unblocked and I am afraid of not "making" it. I have been accused of tendentious editing in the section just above this and have been blocked for it. I have also been accused of Sock puppetry. However, I am not a sock puppet, although my edits may be similar to that of User:Jishnusavith and "Souniel Yadav". in this edit and in this edit have posted that there is, No non-stale socks in archive (which means I am not a sock puppet) in my Sock puppet investigation here. One of you please adopt me and mentor me so that I learn the difference between acceptable editing and tendentious editing. I promise not to edit wikipedia till you certify that I am eligible to edit Wikipedia. Thanks!&mdash;Dr2Rao (talk) 07:40, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I can say with certainty that you know better than this. —  Newslinger  talk   09:22, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

 Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive. ([ block log] • [ active blocks] • [ global blocks] • [//tools.wmflabs.org/xtools/autoblock/?user=&project=en.wikipedia.org autoblocks] • contribs • deleted contribs • [ abuse filter log] • [ creation log] • change block settings • [ unblock] • [ checkuser] ([ log]) )

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If the block is a CheckUser or Oversight block, was made by the Arbitration Committee or to enforce an arbitration decision (arbitration enforcement), or is unsuitable for public discussion, you should appeal to the Arbitration Committee. Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice. —  Newslinger  talk   09:24, 23 September 2020 (UTC)