Paugussett

September 2020

Hello, I'm Njd-de. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Jonathan the Husky have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks. NJD-DE (talk) 21:28, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Njd-de! This was not a test edit. I think the bots gave a false positive. If you feel my edit was not constructive feel free to elaborate. Paugussett (talk) 17:03, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Meters

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at User talk:Meters. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Is there some reason you left a cryptic question on my talk page, without a header, in the middle of a thread from 18 months ago, and struck out the remainder of my talk page? Please stay off my talk page unless you understand how to use talk pages. I don't want to have to clean up after you again. Meters (talk) 04:04, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

My question was not cryptic, and I thought the header was relevant. My apologies for not understand how your talk page works. I did not mean to strike anything out. Please keep in mind the assume good faith principle. Paugussett (talk) 20:25, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

September 2020

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).

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

---

Request reason:

Not a SockPuppet Paugussett (talk) 07:14, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Every sock puppet denies being a sock puppet, so you will need to give a better answer than a simple denial. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 08:24, 12 September 2020 (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.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

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

---

Request reason:

I'm not sure how I go about proving I have no other Wikipedia accounts. I made no disruptive edits. I only added a category that I don't think anyone is objecting to? Other than that I attempted to engage in cordial discussion with Meters but was met with open hostility. Please review the facts and let me know what I've done wrong here. Paugussett (talk) 19:32, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Accept reason:

per Check User by NinjaRobotPirate. Ad Orientem (talk) 21:50, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

There was no hostility. You completely messed up my talk page, and I pointed it out. I don't know if it was incompetence or intentional, and I don't care. I described your question "Is this a reoccurring issue for you?" as cryptic (twice). It does not matter if you understand what you were asking. I obviously didn't. I mentioned that there was the appearance of possible socking (a fourth brand new account with exactly the same SPA as the three CU-blocked account) and user:Ad Orientem obviously came to the same conclusion. Meters (talk) 19:53, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for shedding light on what you felt was cryptic. This is the first I'm seeing you point that out. My 'this' was referring to the section header "‎Racial Bias on Wikipedia" I posted the question under. Paugussett (talk) 23:09, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

So you are accusing me of racial bias? I consider that a personal attack. Please remove that immediately. Meters (talk) 23:25, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

@Ad Orientem: Paugussett looks  Unrelated via CU. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:44, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

NinjaRobotPirate Thanks. The level of similarity in their editing history here is off the hook. But I will err on the side of caution. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:47, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Please stop attacking other editors. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Again, I consider your comment about me being racially biased a personal attack. And your comment on Talk:Jonathan Trumbull that I "have a history of editing pages relating to black lives matter" is completely inappropriate. Meters (talk) 04:06, 14 September 2020 (UTC)