Sockpuppet investigation

edit
 

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Saiph121, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

SummerPhDv2.0 04:43, 12 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

You are blocked from editing. Edits you make in defiance of that block can be reverted by any editor without further explantion. Additionally, you are making it all the more likely that you will not be unblocked. - SummerPhDv2.0 04:45, 12 February 2018 (UTC)Reply
My account is not related to this Saiph121. Arnasus56 (talk) 04:48, 12 February 2018 (UTC)Reply
Please go to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Saiph121 and explain the remarkable coincidences. - SummerPhDv2.0 04:50, 12 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

Beauty and the Beast (2017 film)

edit

Regarding your revert, please see the Box Office section of WP:MOSFILM, which deals with the issue specifically. MapReader (talk) 07:09, 12 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

Please stop reverting my corrections and read the MOS. MapReader (talk) 14:12, 12 February 2018 (UTC)Reply
If the application of your corrections was applied to Beauty and the Beast (2017 film), shouldn't this action be applied as well to the The Jungle Book (2016 film)? Already applied that correction there. Arnasus56 (talk) 14:15, 12 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

Arnasus56 has been indefinitely blocked as a sock of Saiph121. - SummerPhDv2.0 15:17, 12 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

Blocked

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).

Arnasus56 (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

There's seems to be major misunderstanding. My account is absolutely not a sock puppet to Saiph121. I've mentioned "independent" in my earlier explanation within my talk page. Furthermore, my edit are not illegal nor illegitimate. Arnasus56 (talk) 10:36, 14 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

Decline reason:

Clearly a violation of WP:MEAT at the very least, though I'm pretty sure you are actually the same person. Yamla (talk) 11:45, 14 February 2018 (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.

 
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).

Arnasus56 (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

My account is truly not related to Saiph121, nor the same person committing it that type of action. I am different person being mistaken for this banned user. Furthermore, this account is no sockpuppet or meatpuppet. Please, the blocking is a major misunderstanding in which i did not commit any wrong action. Arnasus56 (talk) 23:17, 24 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

Decline reason:

The behavioural evidence is quite strong. Just saying "no" won't help. Huon (talk) 23:51, 24 February 2018 (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.