Promiseus

April 2020

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Kinu ^t/_c 18:09, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

For the record, you claim that another editor has violated 3RR at 2019–20 Hong Kong protests. This is not true, as that editor has reverted you precisely three times. You, on the other hand, have performed the same edit four times. --Kinu ^t/_c 18:09, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

@Kinu: Both users should probably get disciplined for this. Looks like RR gaming. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 19:10, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Perhaps, but the apparent harassment of the other user by this one on their talk page leads to believe that one may be acting in slightly better faith than the other, so I'll leave any decision on that to another administrator. --Kinu ^t/_c 20:01, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

@Kinu: The other user reverted my contribution thrice and added an Uw-3rr template on my talk page, trying to paint me as being distruptive when it was initially them. I responded by using the same template on their talk page, which they then removed immediately. They then decides to report me accusing me of WP:NOTHERE. It then ends with them getting away scot-free while I'm banned for 72 hours. Are established users allowed to bully newer users now? You saying "I'll leave any decision on that to another administrator" is as good as saying that no further decisions will be made. Promiseus (talk) 21:24, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Notice of sockpuppetry block

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).

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

---

Request reason:

You're kidding right? How exactly do you block someone without evidence of suspected 'sock puppetry'? Why is that even a thing? Wikipedia seems incredibly hostile to new users. I'm not the specified user that you think I am. This is absurd.

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

• the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
• the block is no longer necessary because you
  1. understand what you have been blocked for,
  2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
  3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 02:11, 4 April 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.

In addition to the sockpuppetry concerns, you have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  ~ ToBeFree (talk) 02:15, 4 April 2020 (UTC)