unblock edit

 
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).

JohnT122 (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

I have made zero attacks on editors of Wikipedia. I understand why my edits have been assumed to be attacking, but I am helping to make Wikipedia a safer place for all. JohnT122 (talk) 21:19, 20 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

Decline reason:

Checkuser   Confirmed abuse of multiple accounts.Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:33, 20 May 2020 (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.

That account is not mine. JohnT122 (talk) 21:28, 20 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

How does creating an autobiography, then filing a spurious SPI report against the admin who declined your spurious AIV report make Wikipedia a safer place? OhNoitsJamie Talk 21:30, 20 May 2020 (UTC)Reply
Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

Prove that I wrote an autobiography.

The user was a sockpuppet, and yes, quick deletion counts as vandalism for me. JohnT122 (talk) 21:35, 20 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

I can't prove that, but I can't imagine anyone else besides the subject creating such an article. The likelihood of a biography being created by the subject of the biography is inversely proportional to the actual notability of the subject. OhNoitsJamie Talk 21:38, 20 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

After reading and viewing his content, as well as other publications mentioning him, I had determined that the subject was noteworthy enough to write an article. JohnT122 (talk) 21:45, 20 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

UTRS #31032 edit

https://utrs-beta.wmflabs.org/appeal/31032 is now closed. --Deep fried okra (schalte ein) 15:00, 12 June 2020 (UTC)Reply

Note to reviewing admin on UTRS: user has continued to sock as recent as yesterday (see deleted contributions). OhNoitsJamie Talk 18:08, 22 May 2020 (UTC)Reply
I'm shocked. --Deep fried okra (schalte ein) 15:00, 12 June 2020 (UTC)Reply