User talk:MountainWriter42

October 2025

Hello, MountainWriter42, welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. Your editing pattern indicates that you may be using multiple accounts or coordinating editing with people outside Wikipedia, such as Nepaliwikicreator (talk · contribs). Our policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow this, and users who misuse multiple accounts may be blocked from editing. If you operate multiple accounts directly or with the help of another person, please disclose these connections. Thank you. Wikishovel (talk) 16:43, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Wikishovel Thank you for your Suggestion, literally I don't know who is this @Nepaliwikicreator.

Hello @Nepaliwikicreator please don't do any edits to articles created by myself.

MountainWriter42 (talk) 16:51, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion and re-creation of a page

You requested deletion of Draft:Tanka Timilsina and then, 12 hours and 45 minutes after the deletion, you re-created it. I don't know why you did that, and I don't propose to hazard a guess, but the effect of it was to hide the history of AfC submissions from view. That is very unhelpful. In future, if you request deletion of a page and then decide you wish to keep it after all, make a request for it to be restored, rather than re-creating it without the history. JBW (talk) 22:46, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@JBW ! I will surely. Thank you for your kindness

MountainWriter42 (talk) 11:01, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Block

This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing, because of your abuse of multiple accounts. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock. To do so, first read the guide to appealing blocks, and then add the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} to the bottom of this page. JBW (talk) 13:09, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request

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).

MountainWriter42 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I believe there has been a misunderstanding regarding the use of multiple accounts. I would like to clarify that I have only one account and have not engaged in any activity involving multiple accounts. If my actions have been misconstrued in any way, I am happy to provide further details or explanations to help clear up any confusion. I fully respect Wikipedia's policies and am committed to following the guidelines moving forward. I kindly ask for a review of this block and an opportunity to continue contributing positively to the platform. Thank you for your consideration. MountainWriter42 (talk) 15:10, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

My use of the CheckUser tool indicates you are the same user as Nepaliwikicreator. PhilKnight (talk) 15:24, 21 October 2025 (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.

MountainWriter42 (talk) 15:10, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock

@Philknight said My use of the CheckUser tool indicates you are the same user as Nepaliwikicreator.

I don't know who is this user , totally frustrated ; please block this account instead of blocking me! I have fairly said I have no any multiple accounts on Wikipedia, one thing may be having same IP address also mislead this! I believe in faith & I am very much confident about I haven't any other wikipedia account. Please block @Nepaliwikicreator , this account have edited all the articles which I have done! I think this account user wants to be I will block for lifetime. So that why , you saw interconnections between same edits against same pages misleads & said multiple accounts abuse.

I have already read the policy of wikipedia. I am very dedicated to doing useful edits in multiple wikipedia pages. Still if you think , I am telling lie or wrong hold on with your decision. I am always thinking hard works payoff. By seeing this message on my talk page makes me very nervous & frustrated. I want to contribute a lot on Wikipedia articles for very long time .

Hope ! This message will clearly demonstrate this issue.

MountainWriter42 (talk) 15:55, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So, just to be clear. The two accounts have edited basically the exact same articles. From the same IP address. With, I expect (but haven't checked) the same or very similar device. And this is a complete coincidence? That is your claim? --Yamla (talk) 15:57, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Yamla yes ! Literally I don't know who is @Nepaliwikicreator , assure me to unblock my account. MountainWriter42 (talk) 16:01, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Confirmed sockpuppetry. The above explanation simply doesn't come close to accounting for the technical evidence. This is not just a case of two users editing the same articles from the same IP address, the connections are much stronger than that. --Yamla (talk) 16:05, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Yamla , if you think that , I always appreciate your advice & decision , you are very highly editor as an admin. I got totally frustrated & I don't have any idea how to unblock or remove blocking from my account. Thank you for your advice if there is still chance to get back my account, leave message as a reply.

Even I have fully read policy of wikipedia & learn very well things I didn't prove myself having single account on Wikipedia because @Nepaliwikicreator named user makes totally frustrated. I have no any idea I wiill get back or not.

Thank you for your entire consideration. I am going to quite wikipedia & using or editing from now.

MountainWriter42 (talk) 16:19, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Even without seeing the technical evidence, it's blindingly obvious that the two accounts are operated by the same person. The only thing you are achieving by denying it is making sure that no administrator will consider unblocking you. JBW (talk) 17:58, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you have attempted to evade the block by using yet another sockpuppet. That is another highly effective way of ensuring that no administrator will consider unblocking you. Each time you try dishonestly to evade the effects of your own past dishonesty, you are digging yourself a little further into the hole that you have dug for yourself. Why not just be honest? If you'd done that to begin with you would not have been blocked. If you'd done it when you were blocked there's a good chance you would have been unblocked right away. Even if you do it now you will stand a fair chance of being unblocked after some time (though you've blown your chance of being unblocked immediately). If you continue in the same way you have been going it is likely that you will be site banned, and no administrator will be allowed to unblock you without a community discussion, even if they would like to. It's your choice... JBW (talk) 12:22, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@JBW ! You are incredible, I think know one left this kind of familiar text on my talk page. To be honest , yes I have created account @Nepaliwikicreator , there is a multiple reason behind it , the email added to account @MountainWriter42 has been lost and after 7 days I gain it with multiple attempts. So I have created the account @Nepaliwikicreator ! If this account will unblock I will permanently delete this and keep @MountainWriter42. I think if I tell I have two accounts in wikipedia, I am not able to edit never.so I am telling lie on this. I think account will not unblock for lifetime. At last I have not any intention to misabuse multiple accounts.

Now I am going to quite wikipedia for Lifetime.

Thank you for your concern!

MountainWriter42 (talk) 01:43, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• OK, it's taken me a while to get round to finding time to investigate this, but I have now done so, and here are some of my observations.
• Thank you for at last admitting that the account Nepaliwikicreator was you. As I have already said, it was obvious that it was, but your decision to confirm it is an important step forward. However, I'm afraid that isn't enough on its own: we need some further steps forward.
• The only sense I can make of your remarks about email is to assume you mean that you had lost your Wikipedia password, and couldn't request a password reset because you had lost access to your email account; otherwise I can't see what email can possibly have to do with it.
• So, on the thirteenth of September, you were editing, using the account MountainWriter42, from 7:25 to 9:38. You lost access to your account in the time between then and 9:55, so you created a new account, Nepaliwikicreator. You edited with that account from 9:59 to 10:44, and then you regained access to your old account, and started editing from it again at 11:03. Perhaps you will understand why some people might find that improbable. If that were just a single incident on its own, it would be surprising but by no means impossible, and I would be happy to take your word for it. However, it is not just a single incident on its own: it comes in conjunction with other very unlikely events, and with your known history of lying, and taking in the whole picture makes it much more difficult to believe that it happened that way.
• Now that you have regained access to your original account, you no longer need the new one, so obviously you will stop using it. Oh! No! Actually you don't; you keep on jumping between the two accounts, sometimes at very short intervals. For example, on the 23rd of September, using the account MountainWriter42, you edited the article Anil Kharel continuously over a period of just under an hour; you made 21 edits to the article from 05:56 to 06:53. Then, 9 minutes later, you started editing it with the account Nepaliwikicreator. Now you didn't just happen to lose access to your old account yet again: for some reason you deliberately chose to move from one account to the other. I don't know what that reason was, but it isn't explained by what you have said on this page.
• As far as I am concerned, unblocking you is out of the question until you can satisfy both of the following points:

1. Give a more complete and accurate explanation of why and how you have used more than one account;
2. Say clearly and unambiguously what all of the accounts you have used are.

• I have put a considerable amount of my time into investigating this, and into writing this detailed report for you. To be absolutely blunt, you don't deserve such time to be spent on dealing with you. I don't know of a single other Wikipedia administrator who would have even considered doing this for you, and it is very unlikely that I will do so again. Therefore, if you give another weaselly answer, not telling the whole truth, that is likely to be the end of the matter. If you wish to have any chance whatever of having any notice taken of anything you say, I strongly advise you to deal with the whole thing in one go, telling the whole truth about every aspect of this affair; otherwise the answer will just be "No, goodbye". JBW (talk) 23:26, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Dear @JBW

  Thank you for taking the time to review my situation. I understand that my account history has caused serious concern, and I take full responsibility for my actions. I am writing this message to provide a full and honest explanation of everything that happened and to sincerely apologize for my mistakes.

  ----

  1. Background and Timeline

  I originally created my account MountainWriter42 to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, mainly focusing on Nepali topics and biographies.

  On 13 September, I lost access to this account because I had forgotten my password and could not recover it through email. To continue editing, I created a new account, Nepaliwikicreator.

  Later that same morning (around 11:00), I regained access to my original account (MountainWriter42) and began editing from it again. I realize now that switching between these two accounts made my activity appear suspicious, and I should have explained the situation clearly at that time.

  Afterward, I sometimes edited from both accounts on different devices (computer and phone), not realizing that this could be interpreted as misuse of multiple accounts. That was an error in judgment on my part, and I regret not seeking clarification from an administrator sooner.

  ----

  2. After Being Blocked

  When both MountainWriter42 and Nepaliwikicreator were blocked, I made a serious mistake. I created another account, ELFAK~WIKI, because I still wanted to continue contributing. At the time, I did not fully understand that doing so would be considered block evasion, which is a clear violation of Wikipedia policy. I now completely understand that this was wrong, and I sincerely apologize for it.

  To be fully transparent, the only accounts I have ever used are:

  • MountainWriter42 – my original account.
  • Nepaliwikicreator – created when I lost access to the first account.
  • ELFAK~WIKI – created after I was blocked from editing, which I now realize was a mistake.

  There are no other accounts besides these three.

  ----

  3. What I Have Learned

  This experience has taught me several important lessons:

  • Using multiple accounts without disclosure undermines community trust.
  • Creating new accounts after a block is a serious violation of Wikipedia policy.
  • Clear communication and honesty with administrators are essential for being a trusted member of the Wikipedia community.

  I understand why my behavior caused concern, and I accept full responsibility. My intentions were never to deceive anyone, but I realize that my actions were inappropriate and against Wikipedia’s expectations.

  ----

  4. My Commitment Going Forward

  If given another chance, I promise to:

  • Use only one account — MountainWriter42.
  • Never create or use any additional accounts.
  • Strictly follow all Wikipedia rules and policies.
  • Immediately contact administrators if I experience any future login or technical issues, instead of creating a new account.

  ----

  5. Apology and Request for Unblock

  I deeply apologize to you and to the entire Wikipedia community for my mistakes. I fully understand the seriousness of my actions, and I have learned from this experience. My goal has always been to contribute positively to Wikipedia, and I now realize that honesty and transparency are just as important as good content contributions.

  I respectfully request that you please consider unblocking me. I am fully committed to following Wikipedia’s policies and to being a responsible and transparent editor in the future.

  Thank you very much for your time, patience, and understanding.

  Sincerely,

  MountainWriter42 (talk) 01:17, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are a few other accounts which some people have suspected were you, but having checked the evidence I'm willing to take your word for it that they weren't.

I'm not convinced that you "did not fully understand that [using the account ELFAK~WIKI] would be considered block evasion": it was block-evasion, and there's no other way of looking at it.

Requesting a G7 speedy deletion of Draft:Tanka Timilsina and then recreating it looked like an attempt to hide its history. Can you comment on that? Why did you do it? I can think of a possible reason, but I would like to know definitely. JBW (talk) 13:44, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@JBW Thank you for your message and for bringing up these concerns. I have read your points carefully, and I would like to explain my side of the situation as clearly and honestly as I can. First of all, yes — I was the one who originally created Draft:Tanka Timilsina, and later I requested its deletion under G7 (speedy deletion).

At that time, my intention was not to hide the history, but simply to start the article fresh. The earlier draft had several structural problems, style issues, and some inaccurate details. I thought that beginning again from a clean page would make it easier to rewrite the article properly.

However, I now fully understand that deleting and then recreating the same page can be interpreted as an attempt to conceal the history, which is against Wikipedia’s policies. That was a mistake on my part — a result of misunderstanding the rules, not an attempt to evade them.

I also realize that I misunderstood the idea of a “clean start.” I took it to mean making the article itself clean and well-structured, but in Wikipedia’s context, it has a very different and policy-sensitive meaning related to user accounts and editing history.

Now I understand that Wikipedia’s strength lies in transparency and the preservation of history — every edit, correction, and improvement contributes to the growth of the article.

In the future, I will not request deletion or recreate pages in this way. If I need to make major changes, I will consult with experienced editors or administrators first, and make sure everything is done according to policy.

This experience has taught me an important lesson: contributing to Wikipedia isn’t just about writing content, but also about respecting its community, rules, and principles of openness.

Thank you for raising this matter in a calm and constructive way — it helped me recognize my mistake and learn from it.

I'm committed to being a responsible editor going forward and to rebuilding trust within the community.

MountainWriter42 (talk) 13:59, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, there's just one other question that I meant to ask but forgot. Why did you ask for the account ELFAK~WIKI to be vanished? JBW (talk) 16:23, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@JBW ! Think about when the deletion of an account will not be known to other administrators or users, to prevent them from realizing that ELFAK~WIKi is the same user as mountainWriter42. That’s the reason

MountainWriter42 (talk) 00:54, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Lokesh Bam (October 24)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Carolina2k22 was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines for sports persons and athletes). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Lokesh Bam and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Carolina2k22 • (talk) 11:18, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, MountainWriter42! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Carolina2k22 • (talk) 11:18, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sajan Lamichhane moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Sajan Lamichhane. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because you may have a possible Conflict of Interest. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 06:32, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kiran Paudel moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Kiran Paudel. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and you may have a possible Conflict of Interest. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 06:34, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well! What do you know!

Having given the matter considerable thought over quite a long time, I decided that, despite some doubts, I was willing to give you another chance. Therefore I came back, intending to say that I would consider unblocking you if you could go for eight weeks without any more sockpuppetry. But guess what? I discovered that you have been continuing to evade your blocks with further sockpuppets. So much for your attempt to give the impression that you regret your past dishonesty, and are now telling nothing but the truth. You have just been lying, lying, lying, and attempting to avoid scrutiny by various subterfuges all along. Well, you have succeeded in changing my opinion; I wouldn't even give two seconds' worth of thought to the possibility of unblocking you now, and you will have to work damned hard if you wish to change my mind on that. JBW (talk) 15:13, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@JBW , I respect your decision but, I don't want to use wikipedia anymore and continue this discussion. Best wishes.

MountainWriter42 (talk) 15:27, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Great! Good to know. JBW (talk) 16:57, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@JBW , Had I not been blocked on that day, I might never have come to understand the seriousness of my actions. Yet through this experience, I have gained valuable insight into the importance of integrity, transparency, and respect for community guidelines. I now recognize that shortcuts and evasive behavior only undermine the trust that is essential to collaborative platforms like Wikipedia.

I humbly ask that you consider providing me with at least one opportunity to demonstrate the growth I’ve undergone. I am genuinely committed to contributing positively and responsibly to the Wikipedia community. I understand that an eight-week suspension is substantial, and a six-month probation even more so—but if you were to reconsider and unblock me within a few days, I solemnly pledge never to use alternate accounts or engage in any form of block evasion again.

Furthermore, I declare with full sincerity that if you or any other administrator discovers any similar account linked to me after an unblock, I accept and support a permanent site-wide ban, including an indefinite block from editing. This statement is made in good faith, and with a deep desire to earn back the trust I lost.

Please allow me the chance to prove that I have learned from my mistakes and that I am capable of making meaningful, rule-abiding contributions to Wikipedia.MountainWriter42 (talk) 17:14, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We've had this stuff about learning from your "mistakes" and proving that you can do better, before. It was a load of rubbish then; why should I believe that it's anything different now? Have you ever heard of The boy who cried wolf? Look further up this page: you will see that I wrote If you wish to have any chance whatever of having any notice taken of anything you say, I strongly advise you to deal with the whole thing in one go, telling the whole truth about every aspect of this affair; otherwise the answer will just be "No, goodbye". You read that, and replied to it, telling me at great length how innocent your intentions had been and how much better you would do in future, including saying that you would in future use only this account. After you had said all that, you continued to evade your block, using another account. You will therefore not be surprised to learn that my answer is exactly what I told you it would be. No, goodbye. Don't bother to try to contact me again. JBW (talk) 20:52, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]