User talk:AlchemTarun

Please read this before adding more links[edit]

Hi. Please familiarize yourself with WP:Overlinking and WP:PIPE. For the former, common words like "science" should not be linked. For the latter, please do not use unnecessary piping. Piped linking "X|X" is exactly the same as just "X" so just use the latter. Bennv3771 (talk) 11:42, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please also check that you are actually linking to the correct article. In Phytomedicine, you added a link for dissemination...but the "dissemination" article is about broadcasting messages to the public in the field of communication and has nothing to do with the dissemination of plant diseases. Bennv3771 (talk) 11:46, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This happened again with Immunology and linking to integrity. These links are unnecessary and not an improvement to the encyclopedia. Natureium (talk) 15:32, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And Medical diagnosis. You need to stop adding excessive links. Natureium (talk) 15:34, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Again, please stop adding pointless links. Natureium (talk) 14:27, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 26[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Natural environment, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Beneath (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:12, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Overlinking again[edit]

Do not link to words like damage. This does not add anything to the article, and will not point to a relevant topic. Natureium (talk) 14:06, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ANI[edit]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Natureium (talk) 14:23, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I've blocked your account indefinitely for failing to respond to the above feedback, and failure to communicate in any way. Swarm ♠ 21:17, 25 March 2018 (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).

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

Request reason:

Dear Swarm, sorry for the late response actually from last few days i was not available on wikipedia. Next time, i will take care of overlinking issues and always be available for communication. Kindly, activate my account and if anything required from my end then please let me know. AlchemTarun (talk) 09:00, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:34, 5 April 2018 (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.