That, VarunFEB2003, is a very good question. Actually I'm tempted to PROD it, as looking at it with the benefit of hindsight and distance has not improved it: it's still bollocks. Having said that, and in the spirit of WP:DEADLINE, I'll wait and see what the experts think. MuffledPocketed 18:32, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I continue to urger a merge into a section on Dialects in the article Nepali language on the basis of the policy on alternatives to deletion. As I have said, I'm not the best person to do it, but if nobody else does, I shall. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi, If it is Bollocks, why? Does the dialect not exist? DGG ( talk ) 18:51, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Not the topic of the article, just its quality. MuffledPocketed 16:46, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, thank you Varun, I confess I had forgotten about this. It is an existing dialect per Ethnologue so the title should be redirected (agree with DGG re the target) - I will check when I get to work tomorrorow if I can find any facts about it, but my guess is that only the first three sentences are salvageable, and possibly not even those. --bonadea contributions talk 20:05, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Okay thanks I was just reminding! VarunFEB2003 10:14, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You cannot unilaterally decide a page is "not yet ready to be in article namespace" and move a page to the Draft namespace. If you feel a page isn't ready, you either CSD it or AFD it. You are not part of WP:AFC, you were not asked by the creator to move the page to Draft (which happens occasionally when faced with deletion), and thus you should not be moving the page (unless it's for legitimate reasons like spelling, caps, or DAB). Finally, you moved the page half an hour after it was created, and it was significantly improved shortly thereafter. Not only is this BITING behavior, it's improper for a page under construction. The fact that in this case you happened to be right is completely immaterial.
I'll be completely honest here; you seem to have some talent with computers, but you also have some issues when it comes to (what I will call) the "admin" side of things. I highly suggest you stick to editing Wikipedia (doing translating work and whatnot, which you are good at), and leave the task of dealing with new pages, copy editing, and discussion-closing alone for a while until you've gained some more experience. Primefac (talk) 03:38, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@NQ: Am' pullin' nothing. I clicked it so it ain't copyrighted! VarunFEB2003 10:27, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I've always wondered whether you were simply trolling us all this while. - NQ(talk) 10:30, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I am unable to understand what are you trying to say NQVarunFEB2003 10:32, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Where did you take this pic? - NQ(talk) 10:32, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It was either Singapore or Malaysia both of which I recently visited. It's more likely to be the first one but I'll check. VarunFEB2003 10:35, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I am extremely sorry for the date. First of all I thought it was date of upload so wrote today's but I read and wrote it wrong I have corrected it. VarunFEB2003 10:42, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That is not from Singapore or Malaysia. That is a picture of the Urederra river springs. So once again, why are you lying? - NQ(talk) 10:47, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have put a CSD tag over it so that it settles matters. I have already a lot on my plate and I don't want more fullstop. I clicked that picture so I know anyways..... VarunFEB2003 10:49, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No that does not settle it, we do not tolerate egregious copyright violations. Either you are willfully trolling us or you don't take this project seriously enough. Both are grounds for an immediate block. - NQ(talk) 10:59, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks this is my first time I uploaded a photo which turned to be controversial, I'll not upload pics that can be controversial. VarunFEB2003 11:06, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The claim by Varun that it is his own is obviously deliberate deception. David Biddulph (talk) 11:51, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry if my claims are tending to be false but I have got it deleted. Can't do anything. VarunFEB2003 11:55, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean "tending to be false"? You lied about taking the picture yourself, and when challenged about it you lied again. Wikipedia tolerates a great deal, but deliberate deception is when most people's patience runs out. And what do you mean "Can't do anything"? Who can't do what? The only advice I have for you at this point is total honesty. --Begoon 12:04, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on File:Happy3.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the file appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted content borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. WikiPancake✉ 📖 14:03, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on File:Confused3.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the file appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted content borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Begoon 15:29, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding your recent conduct and editing history. Thank you.Primefac (talk) 00:39, 7 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You have been blocked indefinitely. Even while a discussion about such a block was ongoing and you already tried to save your skin by proposing a one-week block and afterwards staying away from all problem areas, you went to another area, DYK, which you again totally screwed up. Coupled with the copyvio lies above, it is clear that at the moment, you are too often editing in a disruptive way and don't show the necessary competence.
Unless the discussion at WP:AN comes to another conclusion, I would urge you not to request unblock for at least a week, and then only with a very strict set of things you plan to do to avoid running into similar problems in the future. Fram (talk) 08:26, 7 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@ThePlatypusofDoom, Dennis Brown, Begoon, Jonesey95, NQ, Samtar, Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi, Fram, Iridescent, Boing! said Zebedee, Patient Zero, Hobit, RickinBaltimore, Ayub407, Lankiveil, Davey2010, KrakatoaKatie, Sjones23, and Fram: Hello all! So I have been blocked - I am not too surprised. I preempted this. I would like to appeal this block to be change into an indefinite ban. I am ready to the conditions Crow said in there - only only mainspace contributions (without disruption). I do not want to leave this place and I am therefore appealing this block be changed to a ban. Any administrator can block me again if I cause even one disruption after me being unblocked. Give me as long as a ban appeal time I'll agree but please don't indefinitely block me. Please..... With still some hope left in my heart that someone will help me I write this message hope this isn't a false hope. Thank you so much. VarunFEB2003 06:00, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Blackmane: I expect he was confusing a 'Ban' with a 'Topic ban'- i.e. from these troubling areas. But you are dead right- that is essential reading if VarunFEB2003 wishes to lodge an appeal on such grounds. MuffledPocketed 09:58, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Varun, the very fact that we are having this discussion and having to clarify "block" and "ban" is part of the problem, and I don't think you understand this. Rather than take your time and read instructions carefully to understand what you're doing before you do it, you're just jumping right in. Enthusiasm is good, but not when it causes you to act without properly understanding what you are doing. Lankiveil(speak to me) 11:09, 8 October 2016 (UTC).[reply]
From what I've been reading on the admin board, this is precisely the crux of the problem. Blackmane (talk) 11:58, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
For all intents and purposes, Varun, you can't be site banned without being blocked. And usually, the blocks given which coincide with a ban are indef. I've only seen one exception to this in my entire editing career. Hope that helps. Patient Zerotalk 15:50, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That is not really true. If someone is site banned then they are blocked as well. An editor can be topic banned, interaction banned, or if the community decides banned from any portion of Wikipedia while still able to edit in other ways. I believe that is what Varun is asking for. They haven't expressed what they think they should be banned from doing. At this point I would oppose an unblock until they can express that they know why they were blocked and how their proposed banned will solve the problem. -- GBfan 18:15, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I meant site banned, sorry GB fan - I've corrected that. I just got confused. Patient Zerotalk 09:48, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@ThePlatypusofDoom, Dennis Brown, Begoon, Jonesey95, NQ, Samtar, Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi, Fram, Iridescent, Boing! said Zebedee, Patient Zero, Hobit, RickinBaltimore, Ayub407, Lankiveil, Davey2010, KrakatoaKatie, Sjones23, and Fram: Life gives everyone a second chance. What I ask for is just one last chance, I shall never disrupt anything ever ever again. Please give me one more chance to prove myself again. You guys will never have to complain regarding me again. I spent the whole of yesterday reading policies. Please just give me one last chance please please........ i have even prepared my mainspace worklist I'll follow after I am unblocked. You can topic/page/area ban me from the areas I mentioned at WP:AN. I shall never disrupt another thing ever ever ever again. Please... VarunFEB2003 14:12, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Stop pinging everyone. It's annoying. You won't be unblocked today. Wait 6 months, then appeal. ThePlatypusofDoom(talk) 14:18, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@ThePlatypusofDoom: I am sorry regarding that but I really want to be unblocked. 6 months is a long time. One last chance is what I request, please.... VarunFEB2003 14:21, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The point is, Varun, that you can't seem to tell what is disruptive and what is not. This mass pinging of editors, including myself, is disruptive. Until you can make that distinction and stay firmly on the 'is not disruptive' side, no one will be willing to unblock you. Please take the well-meaning advice of the editors in the AN thread and here and simply be a reader for a few months. 'Indefinite' does not mean permanent, but if you persist, 'indefinite' could mean a very long time. Do not ping me again until and unless I give you permission or it's required by policy. Katietalk 14:33, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Okay sorry can I appeal this block after 3 months? VarunFEB2003 14:40, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I just want to make a couple of points here. I appreciate this seems harsh, and your plea for another chance genuinely moves me. But my big concern here is that I have seen exactly this same kind of problem unfolding numerous times, always with enthusiastic young people of around the same age, and it always goes the same way -- multiple "Please, I promise, just one more chance..." pleas. And we've given in... "OK, one more chance...", "Oh dear, you've done it again...", "Please, just one more chance...", and so on. But I now think that being too lenient in the past failed them, and because they never really learned, they ended up indef blocked and chased away for good.
But please, don't think we're rejecting you with no more chances, because that is definitely not what's happening. I think it is in *your* interest to properly understand the consequences of the disruption you have caused, and the only real way to understand is to actually experience the consequence of a block/ban and hope we can keep it to a minimum. There seems to be a consensus developing that you can appeal after 3 months, so I suggest you take that break, perhaps read over the policies that people have told you of, but more importantly take a step back from Wikipedia and try to enjoy some of the other things that this world had to offer... and then when you come back, hopefully you can do so in a more relaxed and less impulsive manner. Does that make any sense? Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:09, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Given that you've pinged me (as has been said above, please stop doing that, as it just illustrates that you either don't know or don't care about the disruption you're causing; anyone with an interest in this conversation is watching it, while anyone else will just be annoyed that you're trying to drag them into it), I'll comment as well. I'd personally be happy with you appealing after one month, but there seems to be a strong consensus of a three month minimum, so mid-January is realistically the earliest you should be aiming for. In addition to the policies which have been (correctly) pointed out to you below, I'll also very, very strongly suggest that you familiarise yourself with the Mission Statement and the Founding principles. These are the non-negotiable core policies at the heart of Wikipedia, and from your history up to now I don't think you really understand what Wikipedia is and what its purpose is.
The key sentence is empower and engage people around the world to collect and develop educational content under a free license or in the public domain, and to disseminate it effectively and globally. Everything that happens on Wikipedia or on any of its sister projects should be working in some way towards that end, or by definition Wikipedia is not the appropriate place for it. Wikipedia isn't a social network; you'll sometimes see a small amount of off-topic chatter from well-established users, but that's tolerated on the understanding that it's creating a friendly environment in which people can work towards that goal, not as an end in itself. The only part of Wikipedia that's of any significance is the article space itself (and to a very limited extent, the File: namespace), and any edit in any other part of Wikipedia should only relate to the maintenance and improvement of those articles. At the time of writing, less than 10% of your edits are to articles (and almost one fifth of those are to Ramal Talca-Constitución, a topic which you clearly don't understand and where your interventions were actively disruptive); to put that in perspective you have more edits to your own userpage than to all Wikipedia articles combined.
We do welcome your enthusiasm, and are glad you want to help, but you genuinely either don't care about or don't understand the disruption you cause, and in light of that I reluctantly have to agree that unless and until you can demonstrate that you actually understand the purpose of Wikipedia and are competent to assist with that purpose, you need to remain blocked to prevent a lot of people wasting a lot of time monitoring your edits. At the very least, I'd want to see an explanation of why you were knowingly uploading copyright violations, which isn't just against Wikipedia's policies but actively criminal and could have led to either the Wikimedia Foundation or you personally being prosecuted for theft, and why you lied about it when challenged. ‑ Iridescent 15:52, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
+1 to being removed from ping list. Sorry Varun, it's just a pain in the posterior and any time I receive more than two notifications at a time, I think I've done something wrong. Patient Zerotalk 20:21, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
+1 (Sorry was meant to have commented here hours ago but ended up with shit of my own)- Anyway like Patient Zero I'm beginning to find your pings a pain the arse so please stop!, The more you ping us the more we want to see you blocked! (harsh but true) - Wait 6 months and come back, In the meantime enjoy the world and forget this place, Come back in 6 months and we'll take it from there, I wish you all best. –Davey2010Talk 00:06, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Just to add to what everyone else has said - although, like Iridescent, I would have preferred a shorter period before you can appeal, and said so in the ANI discussion, the important point is that I do not believe you should be unblocked until you can demonstrate that you understand the purpose of wikipedia, until you understand the many ways in which your editing to date has not served, or has disrupted that purpose, and can additionally demonstrate how you will contribute to that purpose in future. However long that takes, it is what needs to happen. At the moment you are not addressing that.
Above I said that you need to be absolutely honest. You also need to be forthcoming. When people are lied to they find it very difficult to trust the person who has lied. You still have not explained the copyright violations and why you lied. We trust editors to abide by copyright rules so that we can confidently reuse the content they contribute.
You have a lot of enthusiasm - you need to develop a better understanding of what wikipedia is for, where your limitations are, and how to apply the enthusiasm towards improving wikipedia. Learn to walk before you try to run - not doing so is why you have fallen over. --Begoon 01:48, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I've closed the AN discussion finding consensus that you may appeal your block no sooner than 3 months from the time of your block. This is actually an unusually short term for such restrictions. My advice would be to carefully consider what everyone above has told you, there is a lot of good advice. Don't rush to request an unblock the moment you can, make sure you consider your request carefully, and that you do address the concerns of the community in your request. Monty845 04:34, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you all! I will try to appeal this block next year when I am an year older. VarunFEB2003 11:31, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Please take a break from editing for few months[edit]
During this break, read the pages about Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Don't ignore the sub-sections. Most newcomers read the upper part and don't scroll down below.
You are engaged in many areas with no experience.
You should never think of WP:BLOCK EVASION, even with IP address. IP editing is also WP:SOCK.
I'll read them thanks but I do wish to be unblocked and then banned. Thanks! VarunFEB2003 06:18, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
As you are pinging many editors, you must also read WP:BADGER, WP:NOT and WP:TPG. Though pinging is not listed in the page, if you ping the same editors again and again, they will dislike that. 1.39.38.191 (talk) 05:46, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I've just nominated another obvious copyright violation you've uploaded for deletion; I don't believe for a instant that you either have the technical skills to draw botanically accurate fall leaves, nor that an editor in Delhi would choose to depict a species which isn't found within a 10,000 km range of India. Do you want to save me wasting more of my time searching for the original, and tell me where you stole it from? I appreciate that you can't comment at the FFD discussion; in the unlikely event that you want to try to defend this, post a reply here with a request that someone move it across and one of us will copy-and-paste it to FFD. ‑ Iridescent 16:08, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Certificate3.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination.
ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 23:50, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Why does the user page have doubleunderscoreINDEXdoubleunderscore on it? Should it? --Stfg (talk) 09:24, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have reverted the addition of the magic word. I don't believe that the user page of a blocked disruptive user is a page which we should encourage searches from Google and elsewhere to find. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:47, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Quite. Thanks David. I wasn't quite sure enough about it to do it myself. --Stfg (talk) 13:10, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Pigsonthewing: Useful templates and should be kept. We have a lot of clocks in template space and I think we should keep these. VarunFEB2003 11:29, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nomination for deletion of Template:Image usage by The Toggle Suite[edit]
Sorry VarunFEB2003, I only tend to check my email when I get a ping or TP message, and that didn't seem to happen- sorry about that. But, the current situation seems to be the best opportunity available atm. Take care, MuffledPocketed 16:52, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello to all of you! I continuously used to visit this page waiting for March to come! Today I do not write this message as an unblock appeal or something (as I believe I deserved to be blocked) but I saw something objectionable today which I want to bring to your notice. JJBers has moved 9 subpages of mine in to someone else's userspace without my permission. I want these changes reverted and the new pages created deleted. The affected pages are -
Not sure if they'll appreciate the pings... first and foremost, no one OWNs pages. I can understand someone wanting to use your scripts, and putting them in a neutral environment like the User:Example subspace is actually a good idea. Sorry, but I'm declining your request. Primefac (talk) 14:26, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Primefac I know I don't own them! And if they wish to use it they should develop a copy like I did from Cyberpower's they do not have to touch my subpages! VarunFEB2003 14:29, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@VarunFEB2003 and Primefac: A happy medium here would be to move the pages back and copying the code verbatim to the User:Example pages. I don't fully understand why Varun's subpages had to be moved -- samtartalk or stalk 14:36, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Samtar, you make a fair point, and I now see that JJBers is getting some flak on their talk page for the move, so I'll shift them to their original locations. Primefac (talk) 14:39, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Primefac: Thanks for doing the leg work here and moving them back :) -- samtartalk or stalk 14:42, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That's it matter sorted! Thank you so much Samtar you are awesome. And I just saw your RfA, heartiest congratulations to you, really wish I could vote in the RfA and be your biggest supporter. Thank you so much! VarunFEB2003 14:39, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Very true David, some attribution was attempted so I wasn't too concerned about that in my comment. I believe there are suggestions to not even have a copy of it -- samtartalk or stalk 14:45, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Samtar, David, RedRose and Primefac. Hope Wikipedia continues to prosper. Thanks! VarunFEB2003 14:47, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I see that JBers had modified some, at least, of the files. Are they going to be put back to how they were as part of the cleanup, or is that going to be left to VarunFEB2003 to do if and when he is unblocked? --David Biddulph (talk) 14:53, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think they were modified significantly enough to merit reversion (it was just changing the image size to match the box it was inside of). If anything, the edits were positive, because the /Status page was blanked prior to being moved. Primefac (talk) 14:57, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't get you. FIles regarding? VarunFEB2003 14:58, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I went ahead and reverted the changes. Positive or not, it's in the user space, and it shouldn't be modified by other users.—cyberpowerMerry Christmas:Unknown 15:07, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, @VarunFEB2003: I attempted to credit you for the work in the move of the files, so I wasn't trying to steal. I was on the user-space design form and saw your status bar. I deiced to look in it and I found a blank page. As I looked into your userpage and talk, I saw that you were blocked indefinitely from the site, something I considered since technically you can't edit anything other than the talk-page, I believe. I assumed this any I tried to salvage the status bar by moving to User:Example sub-page without much thought other than me trying to think about a way to save it. I even thought about putting it in the template space, but deiced not to. I credited you for most of the work, while I refined the code to something much easier to work with, without causing any massive changes. If you would like to, I could still attempt to move somewhere else and keep the refined code, while still crediting you with most of the work. Thank you for noticing my mistake and fixing it, anyone who feels to comment, I'll attempt to respond and a less childish way than my actions...—JJBers|talk 17:07, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@JJBers: I have no problems if you copy the setup. But you actually moved those pages. You can do a copy-paste if you wish to keep them somewhere else. Even I copied them from Cyberpower. VarunFEB2003 13:30, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Sparkyscience,
I saw your request at Wikipedia:Graphics Lab/Illustration_workshop#Quantum Theory Venn Diagram and since no one else answered it I thought I'll help you without evading my block. So I made one externally and uploaded it to Imgur It can be found at http://imgur.com/gallery/hBx4B. You can upload it here by copying from there. Thank you.
To all others, I hope by this I have not done any harm or have evaded any policy. Please point out if you feel I did, my intentions were only to help the project. Thank you! VarunFEB2003 13:27, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello VarunFEB2003! I don't know if you saw it or not, but the GL/I request asked for a vector file. If you have the vector file, send me an email using Special:EmailUser/AntiCompositeNumber and I'll upload it. I believe this would not constitute proxy editing because a) the edits are obviously constructive and b) I was planning on doing this next week anyway. If you don't have a vector version, don't worry about it: I'll take care of the image next week. --AntiCompositeNumber (Leave a message) 03:39, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes sir I do have the vector version which I created using Inkskape. I am emailing it to you. Thanks! VarunFEB2003 11:40, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I just noticed something. The Email system has changed, the wikimail didn't contain image support so I sent you a blank mail as to get your email id so I can send you a normal gmail with the image. However your email id was not shown to me as the mail was sent by wiki@wikimedia.org Can you give me (here or on mail) your email id so that I can email you the SVG. I find no other way to send you the SVG. VarunFEB2003 11:48, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Google docs, dropbox, medafire? Primefac (talk) 12:58, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No problems Primefac I got an email from him and I have emailed him the SVG. Thank you! VarunFEB2003 13:16, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, darnit! Someone else got to the request first. By the way, the file you sent me is just a raster image embedded in the vector file. It's possible that things got messed up somewhere, so if you need help with Inkscape, let me know. --AntiCompositeNumber (Leave a message) 20:32, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nomination for deletion of Template:Clickable button 3[edit]
Your script User:VarunFEB2003/IndianMilitaryUtility.js is no longer functional because it attempts to get an editToken from mw.user.tokens. The script should instead get a csrfToken. editTokens were removed from mw.user.tokens on October 3, 2019 at Phabricator during this edit as they were redundant to csrfTokens.– BrandonXLF (talk) 00:06, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hope you're well, Varun. Tuck in to a tasty cheeseburger :) ——Serial# 19:31, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Serial Number 54129: Thank you for remembering me 😊, hope you are doing well. I understand that this edit will be counted as a block violation, but I seem to have forgotten the password to my account (and I'm too lazy to reset it :-)) ) Cheers! 180.151.224.99 (talk) 21:01, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I would advise not doing it again then. Consider this a warning. If you have the means to reset it, then that is what you should be doing.—CYBERPOWER(Chat) 19:35, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
