User talk:Chaanakya chiraag nataraj

May 2012[edit]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. ElKevbo (talk) 18:26, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked[edit]

Because of your vandalism to a biography of a living person, as well as your upload of inappropriate images, you have been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia. If you wish to request an unblock, please see Wikipedia:Appealing a block. J Milburn (talk) 19:15, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The information I had put on there (excluding the image) was all factual. I am a student at Caltech, so I would know about Dr. Lewis (I took a class with him - in fact, the same intro chem class I talked about). I would appreciate it if you would at least put back the info I had added, as it was all factual (first-hand knowledge). Thanks. Chaanakya chiraag nataraj (talk) 19:18, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be doing no such thing- I don't know what kind of factual first-hand knowledge this is. Vandalism, no matter how seemingly light-hearted, is not something that is going to be tolerated on Wikipedia, especially when it concerns living people. In any case, first-hand knowledge is not permitted; everything must be cited to reliable sources. J Milburn (talk) 19:23, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you look here, you will be able to see that Dr. Lewis has, indeed, taught intro chem for at least the last 10 years. Also, here is a story about how Dr. Lewis and his team will be working in the Jorgensen building. Of course, there is no source that will say that Caltech students call a building something. All I'm saying is that the vast majority of what I posted was, in fact, true. Chaanakya chiraag nataraj (talk) 19:41, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't matter whether you're his student, his mother or Dr. Lewis himself. You've been vandalising his article, and so you've been blocked. It's not complicated. J Milburn (talk) 19:35, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, I'm not protesting the blocking. I am just saying that the vast majority of what I posted was, indeed true, and there's no reason why it should be deleted. Yes, the image was out of place. Yes, the (All Hail the Great Nate Lewis!) was also out of place. But with that I also included a lot of factual information (see my previous comment) and I don't see any reason why that should be deleted. Chaanakya chiraag nataraj (talk) 19:41, 26 May 2012 (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).

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

Request reason:

I realize I should not have trolled by editing the site, but a) I was going to undo whatever I did once I got a screenshot (I got blocked before I could undo the edits) and b) I will not do it again as it was a one-time joke/prank/troll/whatever and I just wanted to see how fast the response was (apparently too fast for me to even undo the damage)

Decline reason:

From this unblock request and the note below it is quite clear that you don't understand where you were wrong, so declining this. —SpacemanSpiff 06:14, 27 May 2012 (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.

And what kind of edits do you intend to make if unblocked? Max Semenik (talk) 22:13, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I will only make constructive edits (i.e. when I actually know something about the topic). The thing is that with those vandalism edits, I also had some useful information (see above discussion) - the problem was that there were no sources (which I now have) and so they were also considered spam (even though they weren't). In any case, I will not just randomly spam a page. I will ensure I have something to correct or add before I edit a page in the future.