User talk:Imavailable

March 2020
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Mangal Dhillon has been reverted. Your edit here to Mangal Dhillon was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (https://www.youtube.com/user/mangaldhillon) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a media file (e.g. music or video) on an external server, then note that linking to such files may be subject to Wikipedia's copyright policy, as well as other parts of our external links guideline. If the information you linked to is indeed in violation of copyright, then such information should not be linked to. Please consider using our upload facility to upload a suitable media file, or consider linking to the original. If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 18:16, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I'm XXX8906. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Mangal Dhillon have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the help desk. Thanks. XXX8906 (talk) 19:08, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Mangal Dhillon. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. XXX8906 (talk) 19:12, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

The content you added was copied from another website, and thus was a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy. Please don't add copyright material to Wikipedia. — Diannaa (talk) 19:14, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Please don't copy material you find elsewhere online
Hello. I am Diannaa and I am a Wikipedia administrator. Prose you find online is almost always copyright, and cannot be copied here; it's against the copyright policy of this website to do so. All prose must be written in your own words. The Wikipedia copyright policy and its application are complex matters, and you should not edit any more until you have taken the time to read and understand our copyright policy. There's a simplified version of our copyright rules at FAQ/Copyright. Further copyright issues will result in you being blocked from editing. — Diannaa (talk) 20:03, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

March 2020
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for violating copyright policy by copying text or images into Wikipedia from another source without evidence of permission. Please take this opportunity to ensure that you understand our copyright policy and our policies regarding how to use non-free content. 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:. — Diannaa (talk) 20:07, 18 March 2020 (UTC) In order to lift the block, we need to be certain that you understand how copyright works on Wikipedia. Please respond to the following questions, explaining in your own words:


 * What is copyright?
 * How is Wikipedia licenced?
 * Why is copyrighted content not allowed on Wikipedia?
 * Under what circumstances can we use copyrighted content?
 * How do you intend to avoid violating the copyright policy in the future?

Your answers will enable us to establish whether or not you should be unblocked. Please answer below; don't open a new unblock request. — Diannaa (talk) 13:14, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

I have blocked your account, because in spite of repeated warnings, you continued to add copyright material to Wikipedia in violation of our copyright policy. You cannot resume editing until you provide a statement describing how copyright applies to Wikipedia, show that you understand our copyright policy, and make a commitment to follow it in the future.— Diannaa (talk) 20:14, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

If the above is true, you've been violating WP:COI and WP:PROMO, and will likely not be unblocked unless you agree to avoid any direct edits to Mangal Dhillon. --Yamla (talk) 20:39, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

That doesn't make it okay for you to copy material from https://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Mangal_Singh_Dhillon. You are not the copyright holder of that page, and it is not released under a compatible license. It's not okay to copy from Sikh Wiki to Wikipedia. — Diannaa (talk) 22:26, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I spoke to Iamavailable on where he again stated that he is Dhilon and owns the copyright to the content in question. He did not provide any evidence regarding the copyright, and from what he said it would likely be impossible to provide evidence even if he indeed owns the copyright. He was also unable to see that what he wrote was blatantly promotional, argued that he was the only person who could write about himself, and that everything in the current version of the article about him is wrong, including the place of birth - although that's also stated on his own website. He also confirmed a very shaky understanding of copyright. I told him that I'd give him an opportunity to amend the unblock request, but I do not think that unblocking him would be beneficial for Wikipedia. Huon (talk) 01:11, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I've double checked SikhWiki, and I can't find any evidence that their "limited license" is compatible with our licensing requirements. in absence of such evidence, we have to assume that it's not compatibly licensed. Regardless of the copyright issue, SikhWiki cannot be considered a reliable source, as it's a wiki. Imavailable, if your only reason for visiting Wikipedia is to add unsourced promotional material about Mangal Dhilon, I don't think you should be unblocked.— Diannaa (talk) 11:00, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

UTRS 29560
-- Deep fried okra  User talk:Deepfriedokra 03:49, 20 March 2020 (UTC)


 * I have somewhat mixed feelings here. On the one hand your claims that the unacceptable editing was "accidental" seem disingenuous. You repeatedly made the same, or substantially similar edits, which affected more than one part of the article, and you continued to do so after receiving several messages about the editing, and having seen your editing repeatedly reverted. Really, to claim that such a persistent and calculated sequence of editing was "accidental" is absurd, which causes me to be doubtful whether you can be trusted to edit. However, you have indicated a willingness to accept being blocked only from editing Mangal Dhillon, and since the problems have been entirely concerned with that article, it is possible that allowing you to edit elsewhere would be acceptable, especially as you have said that you will avoid making the same mistake about copying content from elsewhere again, which was the reason given for the block. You say that you "agree to avoid any direct edits to Mangal Dhillon". Does that mean that you will propose changes for other editors to make to the article? If so, you would still have to be careful to comply with the conflict of interest guidelines, but I see you have said you will do so., do you have any opinion as to whether a limited unblock would be acceptable? JBW (talk) 19:57, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
 * JBW, I'm not sure he really understands our copyright rules, when he says "Those accidental contents were not intentional and were just part of copy/paste operation". The user's sole activity was to add copyright material to the one article. I suspect if unblocked he will not even resume editing. I am not opposed to a limited unblock as long as you agree to monitor his contribs for further copyright violations. — Diannaa (talk) 20:08, 31 March 2020 (UTC)


 * A couple of questions for you, to help assess whether an unblock would be likely to be helpful.
 * 1) When I wrote my message above I had read "I'll never use contents from any site including that of SikhiWiki which is 'non-compatible'" as meaning that you would "never use contents from any site" (and that includes SikhiWiki, which is "non-compatible", as you call it). However, reading it again I wonder if you meant that you would "never use contents from any site which is 'non-compatible', (including that of SikhiWiki)". In view of the doubts that both Diannaa and I have as to how well you understand the copyright policy, I would be doubtful about unblocking you unless you undertake not to copy any content from anywhere. Can you clarify whether you are willing to make that undertaking?
 * 2) You said that you would "strictly comply with WP:COI", and you also said that you "I agree to avoid any direct edits to Mangal Dhillon". However, not making direct edits to the article about yourself is just one small part of what the "conflict of interest guideline" says. Can you say what kind of editing you do expect to do, if your account is unblocked? JBW (talk) 21:46, 31 March 2020 (UTC)