User talk:Empire AS

Archives (Index) 2 1 3 This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Views

Hi, Empire AS, hope you are fine, this might be a totally unnecessary message, I wanted to ask about your views on the official song of 2021 Pakistan Super League what do you think about it? I would honestly say it is one of the worst PSL song to exist. What do you think about it? Again, this might a really unnecessary message. Thank you. Tahaaleem ^Talk 06:46, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Tahaaleem, sorry for the late response. I was busy in my college days as you may see on my user page. Speaking about the song "Groove Mera", I'd honestly say that it's the worst song of all PSL songs to exist. Although the previous song "Tayyar Hain" wasn't good too much but now that seems to be a bit better than this. It broke the all records of being a bad song. It has nearly 127K dislikes and 255K. Why Naseebo Lal or Young Stunners? It's all due to PCB. Why PCB don't asks the singers like Atif Aslam, Ali Zafar, Rahat Fateh Ali Khan, Asim Azhar and Sahir Ali Bagga to sing for? Well, only PCB should be blamed for this for hiring such singers and making such a horrible song. I didn't even like a single word or line of it. Hope for a good song in PSL 2022. Thank you. Empire AS ^Talk! 06:46, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, hope you are fine, the song has attained 128K dislikes now, you're right on the point that this is the inferior song to exist, yep PCB should be blamed for that, and a lot of fans also have expressed that Atif Aslam or Ali Zafar would have sung this song instead, also we still don't know how will be 2022 PSL song, I would just stay that it will be more cringe, the stupendous PSL song to exist was "Ab Khel Jamay Ga", however "Groove Mera" is my most abominated song ever, however I also see you have been blocked, which was I really shocked to see, when you replied, however I hope your unblock request is considered and you get unblocked, I just hope I also don't get blocked due to talking to a blocked user. Thank you. Tahaaleem ^Talk 08:02, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Tahaaleem, Thank you. I'm also expecting to be unblocked. You should not worry as you won't be blocked for talking to a blocked user. I've decided that if my account wouldn't be unblocked then I'd leave Wikipedia forever. Thank you. Empire AS ^Talk! 08:52, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

I hope your account gets unblocked, because you are a amazing editor of Wikipedia, you have created astounding articles, there is also a WikiProject you have started, if you left that project might be abandoned, I only hope you get unblocked so you can help Wikipedia further. Thank you. Tahaaleem ^Talk 09:18, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

طه علیم Thank you for the appreciation and compliments. I also have a lot of memories attached to this account and some other things too. Hope for best. Thank you. Empire AS ^Talk! 09:35, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

If you haven't helped me going through Wikipedia, I wouldn't be able to reach where I am today, all this happened just because of your help, I would always appreciate your help, I think this might be our last conversation. Farewell and Thank you for everything. Tahaaleem ^Talk 11:26, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Empire AS, if you want to contact me, you can contact me on Discord, if you don't have one, if you want to contact me you can create a account on discord, and can send me friend request on my name with #5578 tag. Although, if you don't want to contact, I'll be fine by that, after all you have helped me a lot. Thank you. Tahaaleem ^Talk 15:10, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Tahaaleem, don't worry with that. I'm on Facebook and WhatsApp. Let my exams be over in June (may be postponed to July or August) and after finishing that I'd tell you about my Facebook profile and WhatsApp number on Wikipedia. Thanks! Empire AS ^Talk! 16:13, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Another thing is that PSL 6 opening ceremony is going to be held in Istanbul, Turkey which would feature Aima Baig, Naseebo Lal, Young Stunners, Humaima Malick, Imran Khan (singer) and at last Atif Aslam. I'm lot excited to see this ceremony. Thank you. Empire AS ^Talk! 16:46, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Really, you mean PSL 2022 right? The singers are great and specially the city, Istanbul, I love Istanbul, after all Turkey is my most favourite country after mine, I am very excited to see it, I wish I could be their to see the ceremony, if this year this virus deteriorates I will visit Turkey. Thank you. Tahaaleem ^Talk 16:57, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Tahaaleem, Oops, sorry, a bit confusion. I'm saying about 2021 PSL (season 6) ceremony on 20 February 2021. It would be held in Istanbul featuring Atif Aslam and other singers above-mentioned. I'm very excited. At last, PCB is going to do something amazing. Thanks! Empire AS ^Talk! 06:46, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Unnamed

Empire AS Bey aoa, if Aik editor ko undo krna ho bcz mujhe lag ra ke jaan boojh ke trickly kisi ki past published wiki contrOvsy Heading having 4 cites delete ki, ES me bhi reason mention nahi kiya, aap kindly mujhe IN-BX kr do ge usmanjunaid177 at jee male, seeking your guidance.U.J (talk) 13:16, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Youjay878, sorry for the late response. Actually I was busy in my college days as you may see on my user page. Can you explain you above comment in English? It's difficult to understand what you said above. Thank you. Empire AS ^Talk! 06:57, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

seeking tips if you help @ usmanjunaid177@gmail . U.J (talk) 16:25, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Youjay878, If you want to undo an edit just click on the "undo" option provided in the page history. Click on the undo button only on that edit which you want to undo. Hope you understood. Thanks! Empire AS ^Talk! 16:38, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Bro, but its bit complicated, plz open "kris duggan" go view its edit history (18:51,15 Sep2020) in remarks its mentioned added infobox but it seems to me it deleated one of its heading of "controvery" already existed for 1 year time. Undo layer would be too lengthy should i go or do re-create same words?. U.J (talk) 17:13, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Youjay878, visit this page, copy the source code of the section "controversery" and re-add it to the article. Be sure to update this section with reliable sources. Hope it works. Thanks! Empire AS ^Talk! 17:43, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Bro, why undo requires refrences from me? (controversy related material) published on wiki dated 18 dec 2017 @ 9:45 and deleted after 1.5 years when already having 4 refrences, I just wanted to revert as it was before bcz to me it seems like editor trickly deleted while adding infobox on 18:51,15 Sep2020. U.J (talk) 20:36, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Youjay878, sorry but you can't revert that edit. Old edits can't be reverted or undone due to intermediate conflicting edits. If you wish to add the "controversy" content again then you'd have to do it manually i.e., by copying the source code and pasting it into the current revision of page. Hope you understood. Thanks! Empire AS ^Talk! 06:50, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Blocked for sockpuppetry

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I've not used any sock puppet account. In the past, I used ALM Aadeez due to security and soon abandoned that account so I removed that user box from my user page. (you may see that in my user page history [1]). What I do is that I use a Wi-Fi that is provided in my hostel to edit Wikipedia. The other accounts might have the same IP as of me due to that Wi-Fi that is used by all of my hostelmates. Why I would create another account when I've such a good account where I've a large number of edits and good articles too. I wasn't even given a single chance to provide my arguments at the SPI case. I know neither Zindaaab nor Gorilla Werfs. I've not created another account and the IP you see may be shared by someone else as the Wi-Fi isn't only used by me. I'd abandon to use that Wi-Fi too to prevent such types of IP sharing and would use my personal mobile data in the future. Thanks. Empire AS ^Talk! 05:44, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Decline reason:

There are some gaping holes in your defense, and I'm being kind by describing it that way:

1. You have heavily edited articles related to Atif Aslam.
2. Here at 06:01, 20 January 2021, Zindaaab just happens to upload an image of Atif Aslam.
3. Here at 08:39, 20 January 2021, Zindaaab requests File:Atif Aslam smiling.jpg be deleted.
4. Here at 11:54, 20 January 2021 you upload an image, File:Atif Aslam while smiling.jpg, which you later add to the Atif Aslam article.

So, your claim that you are unrelated to Zindaaab is demonstrably false, since it would have to be an extraordinary coincidence that two independent members of the same hostel would be 1) editing Wikipedia (a niche hobby), 2) editing in the same subject area, 3) uploading images of Atif Aslam, 4) with similar file names, 5) within hours of each other, and 6) that these people would be unknown to one another. And as for your claim that you used the ALM Aadeez account for security reasons, I find that very difficult to believe when:

Four hours after you tried to beef up Tajdar-e-Haram to save it from speedy deletion,[2] for alleged "security" reasons you logged into the ALM Aadeez account and deleted the speedy nomination. You absolutely knew that you weren't supposed to delete the speedy (it's stated very clearly in the template) and so you used your other account to sneakily delete it so it wouldn't look like you did it, and then conveniently you stop using the ALM Aadeez account after you did this.

While having multiple accounts is permissible, that edit constitutes bad-faith editing, and that would be a violation of WP:SOCK. Since you have failed to acknowledge any of this, your unblock request has been denied. Now really the only questions outstanding are: Why are you sneakily using multiple accounts to hide edits related to Atif Aslam? Are you being paid? And what was the reason for the post on GorillaWarfare's user page? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:14, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

---

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.

Cyphoidbomb, Let me provide my arguments.

1. I edit the articles related to Atif Aslam heavily because I'm a big fan of him and I love all of his songs. Even before creating this account, I was an IP editor and edited Atif Aslam article. I wanted this article to reach FA so I worked on it most of the times and also I'm one of the top contributors of this article.
2. Zindaaab uploads an photo of Atif Aslam and soon requests deletion doesn't mean that they are me. There are lot of Atif Aslam fans and he is enormous popular in Pakistan. They might request deletion of the photo because they might think it to be copyrighted. In the deletion nomination, they also say that they aren't the original author of the photo.
3. I uploaded that image because that belonged to me. I was the author of the image and I added that to the article. However, I can clearly see a slight time gap between their and mine upload. But that might be a coincidence, whether you believe me or not.

Wikipedia is one of the top 10 websites, so editing it is very common. That is not a new thing. I already said that Atif Aslam is very popular so there may be a lot of his fans throughout the country. Regarding the image upload, that was an image taken by me therefore I'm the original author not Zindaaab. By looking at File:Atif Aslam while smiling.jpg, don't you think that the image name is according to the photo? He's smiling so I added the word 'while smiling' in the file name as it was a descriptive name of the photo.

Regarding ALM Aadeez, (Atif refers his fans as Aadeez), I created the article Tajdar-e-Haram and a user nominated it for speedy deletion. I fixed the issue provided in CSD. After some time, I removed that CSD tag from that article because that issue was fixed. I used the account ALM Aadeez as then I was using a public computer not my mobile. If you think that article would be deleted if I wouldn't remove that tag then re-nominate it under CSD. Let's see what would happen. Although I stopped to use ALM Aadeez, but I included the userbox till December 2020. [3] to let other users now about my sock-puppet account plus redirected that account to my original account. I've never used that account to get an illusion of support or to engage in edit wars. I edit Atif Aslam related articles because I'm his fan. See my creations, most of them are related to Atif Aslam and music. I swear that I'm not being paid for even a single edit. Why I would do such comments on Gorilla Warfare page even after getting my cvua training from Puddleglum2.0 and Thanoscar21? If such was my intention then I didn't make 16K+ edits and 40+ articles, 50+ templates and categories and I would have did this all in the beginning of my account not after 10 months just to spoil my community trust and get blocked. Thank you. Empire AS ^Talk! 17:17, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

When people get caught up in a lie, one thing they often do is provide details nobody asked about, and answer questions that nobody asked, which I see a lot of above. For example, I didn't ask you why you uploaded an image or why you named it "Atif Aslam while smiling.jpg", rather, I stated that there were six extraordinary coincidences surrounding Zindaaab's uploads and yours, and that some of those coincidences was that you both used similar file names. But I found another coincidence: The "Atif Aslam smiling.jpg" uploaded by the Zindaaab account was the exact same picture as the one you uploaded a few hours later, an image you claim to have taken yourself! So, no rational person looking at this string of coincidences would possibly believe they are coincidences no matter how much you yammer. The likelihood you will be unblocked while maintaining this obvious BS story is virtually nil. Your only chance of being unblocked would be if you came clean. But even then, there's a serious question about whatever conflict of interest you have with regard to Aslam, since it's not very often we see editors take up-close photos of celebrities' faces unless they have some sort of connection to them. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:41, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Cyphoidbomb, You said that uploading files with similar names, so I explained that the name of the file was clear from the photo as he was smiling. Giving similar names to such images may be very common. It was the answer of your question of uploading files with similar names. The other thing I said that I'm fan of Atif Aslam was to clarify you that I'm not a paid editor. I also didn't shoot this photo myself but I asked one of my friends on Facebook to send me his photo so that I could upload that to Wikimedia. Whereas, I've never seen him live. As soon as I got this photo, I uploaded the photo and then into the article. If I were Zindaaab then I'd stop using that rather to use more and why I'd upload such photo from a sock puppet account rather than uploading from my original photo. What did you mean by "came clean"? Again I'd say that I have never edited for pay but for my interest and hobby. If you still think me to be a COI, then I'm also the top contributor of Dirilis: Ertgrul (Turkey), Boonie Bears (China), Bandbudh Aur Budbak (India), WikiProject Lanka Premier League (Sri Lanka) and many others. So am I a such big paid editor that I'm being paid by Pakistan, Turkey, China, India and Sri Lanka? Well on this page, you may see a list of my favourites plus verify that I edit these articles mostly. This is just to clarify you that I'm not being paid. Another thing, that if I were to say such thing to GorillaWarfare then why here? They have provided a link to their Twitter account. Why I won't use Twitter to talk with them rather than messaging such irrational here on Wikipedia just for a block? Still I'd say that I've never edited for pay and also I've not did that to GorillaWarfare. My block is baseless. Well, you've rights and advanced permissions and you can block anyone (even before letting them to give their statements) and since I don't have, so I'd have to bear this. Btw, the tag placed on Tajdar-e-Haram {{db-person}} was wrong as it was about a song not a person. Thank you. Empire AS ^Talk! 04:52, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

This is all meaningless off-topic yammering meant to distract from the facts. There is both technical and behavioural evidence that you used these other accounts. If you want to keep lying about it, that's your problem. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:06, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Cyphoidbomb, here I'm agreeing that Zindaaab was my sock puppet account, but not Gorilla Werfs. Here the question arises why I created that account? I created that account to upload the photo of Atif Aslam that I received on Facebook from a friend just to see that whether the photo is deleted or not because recently all of my uploads on Wikimedia Commons were deleted one by one. I didn't upload that photo from my original account just to avoid the Wikimedia Commons blocks. I've not misused that account to perform vandalism, harassment and anything else. You can check that contributions. That's the truth. Regarding Gorilla Werfs, I don't know them. And I've also proved that below to Hut 8.5. I can't imagine to do such with any Wikipedian. You said that if I came clean then I'd be unblocked and now I've told you the truth. Lies are caught up though but truth never changes. Thanks! Empire AS ^Talk! 14:47, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Tahaaleem is my good friend on Wikipedia. We've worked together on a lot of articles and wikiprojects. I'd request him to tell here what he thinks about me. Thank you. Empire AS ^Talk! 07:24, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, so I am here to give my opinion, Empire AS has helped me a lot going through Wikipedia and other things, without his help, I would still be a inexperienced user. After knowing that he has been blocked, I was very shocked to learn that, the user has maintained good faith with other Wikipedians, I would say that, that he didn't do that, but if he did, then I don't what should be my reaction, in conclusion I would say that I wouldn't consider him doing these kind of things, but if it is true, then I don't know, the user and me has worked on a lot of articles. Thank you. Tahaaleem ^Talk 09:01, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Other

@Hut 8.5 and Dreamy Jazz: Can you help? Empire AS ^Talk! 11:58, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

I cannot do much as this is a checkuser block, and I am not a checkuser. I would note that checkuser tool contains information which is more than just your IP. So, although I do not know what checkuser evidence led to the confirmation, it is likely to be more than just your IP address. Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 12:06, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Dreamy Jazz, if not IP address then what? Looking at their contributions, I see that Zindaaab made no edit while Gorilla Werfs made only edit to Wikipedia. I had already revealed about ALM Aadeez in my userboxes to be a sock puppet of me for security reasons in the past which I soon abandoned to use. Morever by watching this page, I don't see any connection between me and the other editors. I'm confused. Thanks! Empire AS ^Talk! 12:30, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Information stored in the checkuser tool includes other technical information. I am aware that it also includes user agent strings. Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 14:41, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

There's nothing I can do about a checkuser block even if I wanted to. They can still be appealed, including to the Arbitration Committee (see here). The evidence given above is pretty convincing to me though and if this was you then it's appalling. Hut 8.5 16:22, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

@Mz7: Can you help? Empire AS ^Talk! 12:44, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Pinging other checkusers or admins won't necessarily help. Your unblock request should be reviewed in good time. Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 14:42, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

• I’ve read your explanation above and it doesn’t sufficiently explain the data in CU. I don’t mind another CU giving their opinion, and I’m more than happy to walk them through how this was confirmed. As for Gorilla Werfs, the overlap isn’t that hard to find: your last edit before being blocked was to Enrique Tarrio, a page GorillaWarfare has edited fairly extensively. You found her user page from the page history and then created a sock to comment on her appearance 10 minutes later. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:39, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

TonyBallioni, well I perform such type of edits like adding short description, removing extra space and capitalization on many articles. The same I did with the above article. Really, doesn't this seem to be a prediction or a guess? As I edits an article, finds the top contributor of it and then creates a sock-puppet to comment on her appearance. Well, why would I do this? Just to get blocked? Thank you. Empire AS ^Talk! 17:31, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

I don’t try to guess the reasoning behind people acting inappropriately on the internet. You did do this, however. I just re-ran the checks on Gorilla Werfs and the evidence is pretty clear. I stand by my conclusions and block. TonyBallioni (talk) 18:24, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

TonyBallioni, Ok, if I were to do this then why here on Wikipedia? They have also provided a link to their Twitter account. If I were to say such things, then why I won't use Twitter to talk with them rather than messaging such irrational on Wikipedia just to get a block? Other thing, the page was edited by a lot of users before and after my edits like Liz, CambridgeBayWeather, NoahDavid771, and many others but you still think that I'm the only one, not from them. Just by looking at the same IP, I guess, you believed that it was I. Did their edit summary match me? Did their way of typing match me? Did their symbols used match me? How can I make you trust that I'm speaking the truth? Thank you. Empire AS ^Talk! 04:38, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

You aren't going to be unblocked because nobody could think of a good reason why you did something stupid. There is good evidence that you did in fact do it, and people do stupid things all the time. The block isn't just based on you editing that page, it's based on technical evidence, but even if there is a reason why the technical evidence is mistaken (such as editing from a hostel, as you claimed above) then that wouldn't explain the fact that you'd recently crossed paths with GorillaWarfare. Someone else editing from the same hostel might be plausible, but someone else editing from the same hostel who happened to notice GorillaWarfare at the same time isn't. If your reaction to being blocked was to accept responsibility and apologise then you might have got somewhere, especially as you're still young. But this track isn't going to work. Hut 8.5 10:44, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Hut 8.5, Really? If I were to do this then I wouldn't do it know but I'd have done it in the past when I was a newbie. I can't imagine to do it now when my account is 10 months old and have 16K+ edits. In the past 10 months, I've not done any such activity (you can check my contributions). So, there arise no question of doing it now. You said: people do stupid things all the time but if I've ever done this in the past at any moment then definitely there would be a record of such activities performed by me. What a story! I edited a page, found the top contributor and created a sock just to post something immoral and immodest rather than using Twitter, where I'd have no worry of being blocked. I came to know about GorillaWarfare about 2 weeks ago when she edited a page from my watchlist, but I did nothing in that period. A random user from the hostel may create an account and post a message on their talk page (by seeing at their edit, what I also noticed is that their capitalization of words, emoticons and edit summary don't match with any single edit of mine). I don't see anything that is hard to believe here. Can you explain 'same time'? You said: If your reaction to being blocked was to accept responsibility and apologise then you might have got somewhere, especially as you're still young. But this track isn't going to work. Good advice though! But how can I accept something that I've not done? I'd be guilty only if I do that but can't apologize for something that I've not even done. I can't lie just to be unblocked and take the false responsibility that isn't performed by me. Still I'd say that I've not done this with GorillaWarfare. Thanks! Empire AS ^Talk! 11:21, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

You're not going to convince people to unblock you with this line of argument. You can't imagine how you could have done this? That's not going to go very far when there's evidence that you did in fact do it. Personally I don't think it's that hard to imagine a straight male teenager catcalling a woman he thinks is attractive. There aren't any contributions like that in your edit history? Of course not, that's why it was done with a sockpuppet. Using one account for legitimate editing and others for disruptive editing is so common it's specifically listed in the sockpuppetry policy. (In any case this isn't your first account.) As for "same time", you made this edit to Enrique Tarrio at 19:44 on the 12th. The Gorilla Warfs account was registered at 19:52 and made this edit at 19:54. Now a checkuser has said there's technical evidence tying you to the Gorilla Warfs account. Let's say, hypothetically, that it was somebody else editing from the same hostel. GorillaWarfare has made numerous edits to Enrique Tarrio and her name is all over the edit history and the talk page. Do you expect us to believe that this hypothetical hostelmate happened to make that edit minutes after you edited that page? And that they were coincidentally uploading images of Atif Aslam smiling hours before you did? Pull the other one. Hut 8.5 12:18, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Hut 8.5, I'm not trying to convince other users. I'm just telling what's the truth. You said that I did it using a sock puppet as there were not any such edit in my contributions. But why it was for the first time? I mean to say that if I created a sock this time for such activity then I'd have also created a sock in the past for these kind of actions. Where's that sock? If I can create a sock now to keep my contribs clean then why not I've created sock in the past for this purpose? The reality is that I've never performed such edits, neither in the past nor now. Speaking about this edit, I'd say that I lied then. Actually I was a newbie and receiving teahouse invitations plus welcome messages. So, I did this to prevent these. Soon I removed that as that was a lie. Now I understood what are you thinking? You are thinking that I edited a random page, found the top contributor and created a sock puppet to comment. She made this edit on 7 February 2021. I was watching this page (if you are doubtful, then see the article's history, I'm one of the top contributor of it). I also noticed that edit but not created a sock on that day (7 February 2021) to comment on her appearance whereas after a week, while editing a page at 19:44, I did this. Amazing thought! If I can post this message after editing the article on 12 February, then why couldn't I do that on 7 February? Sounds queer? What if I didn't make that edit on that day but after a day or two so to keep me safe from SPI case. Was I such a fool that I make an edit on an article and within 10 minutes I do this all. Why didn't I wait to make that edit on one day and create sock puppet next week because I already have waited for a week (from 7–12 February). Thanks! Empire AS ^Talk! 13:08, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

So what? For all we know you have created sockpuppets in the past. Checkuser isn't perfect at finding sockpuppets, especially old ones. Even if you only started socking recently that doesn't make any difference, it's still not allowed. Equally the fact that you could have noticed GorillaWarfare a week earlier doesn't make any difference. If anything the fact that you remembered someone who made a minor edit to one page on your watchlist a week earlier makes it sounds more suspicious. Don't bother pinging me again, I don't think this discussion is going anywhere useful. Hut 8.5 13:17, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Well, now you've nothing left. I've clarified all of your doubts. I explained everything. I'd not ping you anymore as I think that you don't have capacity to bear the truth. Thanks! Empire AS ^Talk! 14:35, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

It is strange that someone in your hostel edits Wikipedia to comment on GW's appearance, does so 10 mins after you edit a page which she has edited, when you have been also recently been using a undisclosed account (Zindaaab as you agree to above). It is also strange that you have reversed your statements about using Zindaaab. You didn't agree to using Zindaaab and then now do. I can see that you were both capable and willing to lie after being caught about Zindaaab. I'm sure you can see how this could easily stretch to you lying about not using the account Gorilla Werfs.

I have some advice: the community does not like editors who continue to lie after being caught. It shows that you can't be trusted. We know that (unless by some very very unlikely chance) you have used and control all the accounts. If you admit to it yourself, then it is one step towards being able to regain the trust of the community. It is good that you have admitted to one of the accounts, but you will need to be open about this before trust can be rebuilt. Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 23:53, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Regarding Zindaaab, I just used that account to upload a photo, not to harass anyone or vandalize any page. I didn't performed any edit using that account on Wikipedia but on commons. I uploaded the photo from Zindaaab just to see that whether it's deleted or not. But regarding Gorilla Werfs, I'll never admit that I own that account even if it appears a lie to you. I don't want to regain the community trust by lying. I'll speak the truth even if someone trusts me or not. Regarding Gorilla Werfs, I've explained everything above to Hut 8.5 who doesn't want to discuss it further (perhaps due to –). I'm not pinging you as it may bother you as happened with Hut 8.5. Thanks! Empire AS ^Talk! 07:08, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

• For some clarity: this is not nearly as ambiguous as you’re making it seem. It’s some of the strongest CU evidence I’ve seen since I was appointed 2.5 years ago. People always assume CUs don’t take into account the “possible shared IP” type of defence. I don’t know an active CU who doesn’t regularly ask for second opinions when there’s the possibility of a shared connection or ambiguity in the data. There was no such ambiguity here. If you wish to publicly get a second opinion on that from another CU, I’d recommend you file another unblock request. Cyphoidbomb, Hut8.5, and Dreamy Jazz are all colleagues I respect highly. They can’t unblock you without the consent of another CU, though, so arguing with them on how the behaviour supposedly exculpates you (though it doesn’t) isn’t going to help you get unblocked. I’m very confident in my findings here, and any CU who checks the Gorilla Warfs (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) account will easily see the same things I did. My honest advice is to wait 6 months, admit what you did, and request an unblock then. If you wish to continue publicly arguing your case, file another unblock request. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:05, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

I can wait for 4 – 5 months, but would not admit what I've not done. Although your evidences were clear i.e., the IPs may be same and the times were nearly same, but I've also explained everything above to Hut 8.5. I don't think that there's a need to explain that to you too as you may also act like Hut 8.5. Not pinging to avoid bothering you. Thanks! Empire AS ^Talk! 07:08, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

6 months, not 4-5. You’re also not going to be unblocked unless you admit it. You didn’t explain anything to Hut8.5 in a way that provides any support for your claims. As I said, if you believe that you have sufficiently explained it, file an unblock request and another CU will come along and look at this. The back and forth without an actual active request to unblock doesn’t serve a purpose. TonyBallioni (talk) 13:45, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Well there's not a big difference between 6 months and 4–5 months. Another thing that I want to clarify you is that I'm not going to admit that lie, neither now nor after six months. I don't know whether you want me to admit the truth or something that I've not done. My answer would never change even after 6 months, 1 year, 2 years and so on. I've explained everything above to Hut 8.5, re-read my above posts. Hut 8.5 ends the discussion with 'So what?'. I'll make another request next week as I'll inactive for some days onwards. I'm feeling like a paralyzed man who is just able to move a single finger. Empire AS ^Talk! 16:05, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

If you're under the impression that I conceded you're right, or something like that, then you're mistaken. "So what?" means the points you made were irrelevant and don't prove anything. I suggest you follow TonyBallioni's advice (the standard offer): wait six months, admit the socking, promise you won't do it again and ask for an unblock. Hut 8.5 18:11, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

It would made me laugh :-D. When you've left nothing to say, you used these words but refused now. I provided comprehensive answers to all of your questions. You also said that you don't find this discussion useful. TB suggested good offer though where I can wait for 6 months, also may promise not to repeat socks like Zindaaab but not admit socking of Gorilla Werfs. The working procedure of offer clearly says: Apologies and other expressions of remorse aren't necessary, but basic courtesy and a willingness to move forward productively are. So I'll not apologize for an unperformed act. Thanks! Empire AS ^Talk! 18:29, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Prem Bandhan.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Prem Bandhan.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:20, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

What did happen?

Tyrone Madera, Hi, hope you are well. I just wanted to ask that why you've stopped to talk with me? Are you fine, physically and mentally? Few days earlier, you asked a lot of things but nothing now? I wonder that what may be the cause behind this. I apologize if I've said something wrong to you. But your silence doesn't seems to be a sign of good thing. Whereas I also want to thank you for your help and support. Thanks!! Empire AS ^Talk! 18:45, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Empire AS, I'm doing well, thank you for asking . I didn't want to comment because I was worried about interfering in your appeals process and potentially hurting your appeal. Everything on Wikipedia is public, and I'm such a new user that I don't really know what I'm doing. Some of the questions that I've asked have been answered while you were away, and I was afraid to follow up and get caught up in the appeal process without knowing my stuff. However, if you would like me to speak on our exemplary interactions and how well you've treated me, I would be more than happy to .

Thanks,
Tyrone Madera (talk) 19:33, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Oh, well that's fine. Gradually by time you'd know many things about Wikipedia, you shouldn't worry about it. Morever, I also can't talk anymore to you because it may result in my talk page access revocation. Thanks for clarifying! Empire AS ^Talk! 05:49, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Empire, you should be aware that while you are blocked, you should only be using your talk page to discuss matters related to your block, not for general chit-chat. This is a surefire way to wind up with your talk page privileges revoked. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:49, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Ok, I'd act upon your advice. If my talk page access is revoked, then I'd be unable to request for an unblock. Thanks for watching out my talk page! Empire AS ^Talk! 05:49, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Colombo Kings in 2020

Hello! Your submission of Colombo Kings in 2020 at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Edge3 (talk) 02:19, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, Empire AS! I see that you're preoccupied at the moment, but I just wanted to let you know that the aforementioned nomination is on hold. Yoninah previously added a bunch of "citation needed" or "clarification needed" tags to the article that you were supposed to address. However, Yoninah has since gone on an extended leave, and is therefore unable to help with the article. As such, I'm taking over the review.

Did you coordinate the review with Fade258, who created the Colombo Kings in 2020 article? Are there other editors, in addition to Fade258, that you know who might be able to help out? I'm trying to figure out the best way forward with this nomination. As you know, there were plans to submit a combined, five-article hook at DYK, with several different editors involved. Since I'm the reviewer, I can't get too involved with copyediting. (Otherwise, I would have to pull in yet another reviewer!) Hopefully there'll be a way to get the content up to standard... Edge3 (talk) 02:26, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Edge3, thanks for reaching out. This is a list of the participants of the project. If I'd be able then I'd correct this myself as soon as possible. But as you know that I can't do anything therefore I'd request Tahaaleem or Fade258 to fix these issues as soon as they can. I'll also request you to the delay this nomination for a week as Tahaaleem becomes active only on weekends (may be Friday or Saturday). He will fix the issues in the article and then It would be ready for DYK. Thank you very much! Empire AS ^Talk! 05:41, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Fade258, you don't need to edit the DYK nomination page. It's alright. Rather you should edit the section "Season summary" of the article Colombo Kings in 2020. Copyedit the season summary section and remove all the "Clarification needed" tags. Thanks! Empire AS ^Talk! 07:18, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello! Your submission of Colombo Kings in 2020 at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Edge3 (talk) 17:51, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi! Just wanted to let you know that I'm marking the nomination for closure, due to inactivity. However, I'll allow the rest of the multi-hook nomination to proceed at Template:Did you know nominations/Jaffna Stallions in 2020. Thank you so much for your contributions to DYK! We hope to see you again soon. Edge3 (talk) 17:51, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Unblock request

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

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

---

Request reason:

many things]] to do in future (i.e. participate in AfDs, NPR, RCP, and AIV etc) that would be possible only if I'm unblocked. I can clarify all of your doubts if you have left anything else to ask. Thank you for reading the request. Hoping for the good. — Empire AS ^Talk! 17:53, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Notes:

• In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
• Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=many things]] to do in future (i.e. participate in AfDs, NPR, RCP, and AIV etc) that would be possible only if I'm unblocked. I can clarify all of your doubts if you have left anything else to ask. Thank you for reading the request. Hoping for the good. — [[User:Empire AS|<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: Red">Empire <span style="color: Blue;">''AS''</span></span>]] <sup> [[User talk:Empire AS|'''''<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: Purple;">Talk</span>!''''']]</sup> 17:53, 26 February 2021 (UTC) |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=many things]] to do in future (i.e. participate in AfDs, NPR, RCP, and AIV etc) that would be possible only if I'm unblocked. I can clarify all of your doubts if you have left anything else to ask. Thank you for reading the request. Hoping for the good. — [[User:Empire AS|<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: Red">Empire <span style="color: Blue;">''AS''</span></span>]] <sup> [[User talk:Empire AS|'''''<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: Purple;">Talk</span>!''''']]</sup> 17:53, 26 February 2021 (UTC) |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=many things]] to do in future (i.e. participate in AfDs, NPR, RCP, and AIV etc) that would be possible only if I'm unblocked. I can clarify all of your doubts if you have left anything else to ask. Thank you for reading the request. Hoping for the good. — [[User:Empire AS|<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: Red">Empire <span style="color: Blue;">''AS''</span></span>]] <sup> [[User talk:Empire AS|'''''<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: Purple;">Talk</span>!''''']]</sup> 17:53, 26 February 2021 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

•  Administrator note Two uninvolved CheckUsers looked at the technical data and determined it to be sockpuppetry. I also tracked the behavioural evidence and concluded that two of the accounts were used for bad-faith editing. Let's also remember that you lied about Zindaaab repeatedly until finally admitting to it, aaaand you also committed blatant copyright violations as both Zindaaab and as Empire AS, by uploading non-free images and declaring them as your own. So, just on that alone, that's the use of multiple accounts to engage in disruptive editing, a clear violation of WP:SOCK. Linking the GorillaWarfs account isn't even required to justify a block, but based on the additional explanation a CU gave me, the technical evidence is compelling that you are also linked to that account. Why you're lying about it, is likely because you realised that it would be perceived as sexual harassment in a climate that no longer tolerates that shit. I'll let another administrator a CheckUser will handle the unblock request, but your chances of being unblocked are nil. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:27, 26 February 2021 (UTC) An administrator won't reverse a CU block. Edited to reflect this. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:37, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

2 CUs? Only the blocking CU, TonyBallioni was present here that isn't an uninvolved CU but an involved. Which 2 accounts I used for bad-faith editing? ALM Aadeez or Zindaaab? I don't see any bad-faith editing performed from them. I didn't use them for vandalism or illusion of support. I agreed about Zindaaab the next day of lying but not continuously kept lying. Although the photo didn't belong to me but that was not already present on internet so I uploaded that because the older photo in article was not too good. I agree that was copyright violations on Commons but not on Wikipedia. Morever, I used Zindaaab just on Commons so block should be limited to Commons only iff I'm blocked for using Zindaaab. I'm not lying about anything but speaking the truth that's hard to believe for you some users. But if you consider my request neutrally, you may see a higher chances of being unblocked. I'm still not sure that how can I assure you that I'm not connected to Gorilla Warfs. If you have further questions, let me know but please don't ask anyone to review this request or to revoke my talk page access. Btw I don't know whether you have noticed this edit or not. Thanks! Empire AS ^Talk! 18:51, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

This isn't a court of law, and nobody is required to convince you to your satisfaction that you broke the rules. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:49, 26 February 2021 (UTC)