User talk:Sankararamank

Stop with the disruptive page moves

If you move another page inappropriately, like the two you have just moved, I will block you for disruptive editing. I have no idea what you think you were doing in either case. Bencherlite ^Talk 12:53, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Move of User:117.235.197.232 to your sandbox

I moved User:117.235.197.232 to User:Sankararamank/Sandbox.

Please do not create any page that starts with "User:" unless it starts with "User:Sankararamank/". davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 21:42, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

FROG ALLIEN

Hello Sir!

  Thanks for Uploading Suriya and Samantha Photo. I like it.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by FROG ALLIEN (talk • contribs) 16:07, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Samantha205.jpeg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Samantha205.jpeg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:38, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

November 2013

Please stop your disruptive editing. Your edits have been reverted or removed.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively may result in your being blocked from editing. DMacks (talk) 15:32, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Samantha205.jpeg

Thanks for uploading File:Samantha205.jpeg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. See Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2013 November 8#File:Samantha205.jpeg for more information. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 21:22, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Rowdy (2014 Film)

The article Rowdy (2014 Film) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

It may be a language issue but I cannot find anything to suggest that this future film meets notability guidelines at this time.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 03:00, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you create an inappropriate page, as you did at Rowdy (2014 film), you may be blocked from editing without further notice. DMacks (talk) 16:08, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. DMacks (talk) 13:57, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your request for unblocking

Please look at the notice where you have been blocked. The mechanism to request a review of the block is explicit and within it. I spotted your request on a user talk page that is on my watchlist and felt that you needed this advice. I understand why you have edited there as an IP editor, but this is a mistake. Please do not attempt to edit Wikipedia without logging in until this matter is resolved. It may be that the block is lifted or it may remain for quite a while. You will note that there is no end date. This does not mean "For ever", it means, simply, that the end date has not yet been determined. Your actions now are important. Please think well about what they should be. Fiddle Faddle 10:33, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your use of multiple Wikipedia accounts

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sankararamank, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

Fiddle Faddle 13:57, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your use of multiple Wikipedia accounts

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sankararamank, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

Fiddle Faddle 14:26, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your use of multiple Wikipedia accounts

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Amaravathiarun, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

Fiddle Faddle 23:52, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]