 | This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet of Tesi1700 (talk · contribs · global contribs · page moves · user creation · block log) that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:45, 21 December 2013 (UTC) |
SGellner (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I only have this account and I don't understand why you think I'm someone else. My handful of edits aren't controversial either, which just adds to my confusion as to why I was banned. Could someone elaborate? Thanks.
Decline reason:
It's all in the SPI. I should add as support my observation that there does seem to be a similarity in how you interact. — Daniel Case (talk) 01:21, 16 February 2014 (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.
SGellner (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Thanks for that link, although I still don't really get it. I saw some stuff on Mobile Reads regarding Ectaco using sockpuppets (which is kinda ironic now...) and I added that information to Ectaco's wiki entry. That spawned a big todo between a bunch of folks, but I chose to say out of it. That's all that I know really, and I guess there's not much else I can do to convince you I'm just me. As for similarity in how we interact... I don't really have any comments on that, I just make minor updates here and there. Anyway... if you're not going to unblock me, am I okay to start a new account? Or can I never edit Wikipedia again?
Decline reason:
See Callanecc's answer above. The SPI was pretty conclusive. The onus is on you to be honest here, tell us you know what you did wrong and how you will do differently in the future. Take your time. John (talk) 18:37, 16 February 2014 (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.
SGellner (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I am being honest. As far as I'm aware, I didn't do anything wrong. I felt the information provided on Mobile Read (that Ectaco had engaged in sock puppetry on the Mobile Read site) was pretty conclusive, so I added it to the Ectaco page. If I shouldn't have done so, I apologize and will happily agree to not using that site as a source in the future. As for the sock puppetry, I claim complete innocence. Yes, it was my original edit that set off that back-and-forth editing of the Ectaco article, but I don't see how that is conclusive of me being a sock puppet. How can I be held responsible for what others engage in? Once I saw what I had inadvertently started, I decided to bow out and let those people sort it out. How can I prove to you that I'm not a sock puppet? I see there's talk of the University of Sonora in the SPI... I've never been there, I've never even heard of it. I live in Canada. I don't know what else I can tell you. SGellner (talk) 21:33, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
Decline reason:
SPI evidence seems pretty conclusive. only (talk) 12:33, 3 March 2014 (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.