User talk:Rosguill/GargAvinash NPPSCHOOL


 * Q. Did I do a mistake in this edit? It says about someone had intricate links with a political party! — GargAvinash talk 18:21, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
 * , that looks like a gray area to me. On the one hand, from reviewing past discussions cited at WP:NPPSG, there's no consensus on whether or not The Quint and The Wire are reliable. That having been said, claims of funding don't seem particularly controversial, and I'm not sure it's necessary to couch them in attribution, which is usually reserved for analysis and/or disputed claims. Is there any reason to believe that these sources' claims of funding are inaccurate? signed,Rosguill talk 18:27, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
 * These two sources seems only to cover about funding. — GargAvinash talk 07:35, 3 May 2020 (UTC)


 * I sometimes think that it can be a serious issue. I was blocked from editing on two accounts. Appealed for unblock many times but none was ready to unblock me (I seriously don't know why). Should I declare that this account also belongs to the same person? Albeit my edit history is good but I think I will be blocked again for the reason of sockpuppetry. — GargAvinash talk 17:59, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
 * could you clarify what these accounts were? Generally blocked editors are able to rejoin under the standard offer, but it really depends on the original circumstances of the block. signed,Rosguill talk 19:29, 3 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Accounts are and . If community will not block the current account then we will continue at NPP School. — GargAvinash talk 06:24, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
 * thank you for being so forthcoming about this. I think that there's an argument to be made that the time since you were originally blocked in 2017 could be treated as time served, in which case you would be free to continue editing. The process by which this is decided is via a public discussion at the Administrators' Noticeboad, and speaking honestly I haven't been involved with enough unblock cases to have much insight as to how admins are going to vote on this. If you're willing to have this be reviewed there, I can go ahead and start the thread. signed,Rosguill talk 18:01, 4 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Please do what you think is right or suggest me what should I do. — GargAvinash talk 18:44, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
 * , I've started an unblock request at AN. I would suggest not commenting there unless someone explicitly pings you to ask for your opinion. signed,Rosguill talk 19:19, 4 May 2020 (UTC)


 * I would like to say one thing, I created this account from a completely new device and I never logged in Wikipedia as or  from the device before making the last two unblock requests. I made unblock request and confessed here (also emailed ) that those are my accounts because I felt that after NPP School, I might get reviewer right which is generally given to trusted users. I didn't want to game the system and Wikipedia Community (and Community is giving me 'ban' for this honesty). Moreover, I was a 10th-grade student and was 14 years old then (in 2015) so I didn't have much knowledge about Wikipedia. I didn't add my words to AN because you told me to not to do so. — GargAvinash talk 15:14, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, this doesn't completely add up in my opinion. You seem to be deluding yourself when looking at it like this. For example, what was the motivation behind requesting an unblock in April 2020, twice? If it was really "honesty" or coming clean, why did you omit the existence of the new account? If you learned from the declined appeals, why did you continue to edit with the sockpuppet until yesterday? If you "didn't want to game the system", why did you do so, even after having an appeal declined and another account blocked for doing exactly the same thing before? You have been dishonest and betrayed the community until yesterday, and that's what you probably get banned for. I'm not sure what you expected instead: If someone silently commits a crime all the time until yesterday, and then suddenly makes a confession, do you expect them to receive a friendly reaction and encouragement? You can't expect praise and compliments for what you did. You can't expect an exemption from the policies, especially not one day after violating them. You can only expect a better situation when appealing the ban one day, perhaps in six months, perhaps in 2021. This is not a reaction to honesty, it is a reaction to dishonesty that suddenly, finally stopped. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:39, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
 * (The above message contains rhetorical questions that are intended to make you think again. You may have a self-delusional answer to them, but I recommend not writing it yet. Instead, think about this until making your appeal, then answer them in your appeal. It's too early for that to happen; please resist the urge to reply with petty excuses.) ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:43, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

— GargAvinash talk 20:47, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Q: what was the motivation behind requesting an unblock in April 2020, twice?
 * A: I know that I had very few edits on and . I would had easily forget about those two accounts as I was doing well with  and I am using a new device so there were no such proofs that those two accounts are mine but I saw some users stated on their userpage that they have multiple accounts. Then only I thought of appealing unblock with the same device. I knew that any CU can see that but I requested unblock from the same device. I wanted to regain access to my first account and thought to use it as alternative account. I emailed User:Yamla for the same but they didn't reply. Requested Twice because you said that I should mention the name of articles.
 * Q: why did you omit the existence of the new account?
 * A: In my appeal on User talk:Kumargargavinash I didn't mentioned that is a sock because this account could also be blocked for no reason but just for sockpuppetry (It is happening now, I regret; I should had mentioned it in those appeals).
 * Q: why did you continue to edit with the sockpuppet until yesterday?
 * A: I admit my stupidity but please watch my edit history. I haven't done anything that violates COI for which I was blocked. Even in the account, I tried my best.
 * Q: why did you do so, even after having an appeal declined and another account blocked for doing exactly the same thing before?
 * A: I remember, I created in October 2019. Till that time I didn't read the sockpuppetry policies. I started learning gradually about Wikipedia policies by the edit summaries of other editors. I got to read Notability guidelines after Rajendra College, Chapra was tagged for CSD. I knew about AfD when I applied for AfC and an user declined it referring to my no AfD, CSD and PROD histories.
 * You have been dishonest and betrayed the community until yesterday, and that's what you probably get banned for.
 * Re: I may be 'dishonest and betrayed the community' by creating and editing with and . But also, I think, my ALL edits are good faith edits. I never intended to do destruction here.
 * Re: I may be 'dishonest and betrayed the community' by creating and editing with and . But also, I think, my ALL edits are good faith edits. I never intended to do destruction here.


 * Everyone except is treating me like I've done some serious crime by creating sockpuppets. I always intended to help Wikipedia, be it by socks too.  was in favour to grant me Autopatrolled right. Last two articles that you deleted was created by following the list at Sixth Nitish Kumar ministry. I wonder, there is a criterion that even good articles should be deleted if it is created by a blocked user. I should welcome the decision of the community but community should also acknowledge that they are blocking me for creating sockpuppets and lying for them. As I have been very dishonest to the community, I should not appeal for not blocking now. I have stopped editing. And yes, my above answer is completely true and it was written after reading your note. I know it's hard to believe a lier but I don't see any other way to make community believe me. — GargAvinash talk 06:48, 6 May 2020 (UTC)


 * One last thing, I didn't understand that was instructing me to not to reply now, maybe it's my problem. He wrote "but I recommend not writing it yet". I could have understood if it was "but I recommend not writing it now". I thought that he is recommending me to write the answers after a good think. — GargAvinash talk 22:05, 6 May 2020 (UTC)


 * What should I do now? — GargAvinash talk 06:38, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry for letting you wait for the result of the discussion. Perhaps someone finally closes the discussion in this week. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 06:50, 12 May 2020 (UTC)