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.
Ponyobons mots 22:53, 1 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

Unblock request

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).

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


Request reason:

I don't expect to be unblocked, but yes i do admit i am TzarN64. However, i did learn my lesson and improved Wikipedia for the better. For an example, i made articles Tomb of the Mask Bendgate, and Antennagate. I apologize for my past actions as TzarN64, and TheSecondComing10. SMBMovieFan (talk) 23:00, 1 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

Decline reason:

Block evasion just digs a deeper hole, and resets any potential WP:STANDARDOFFER. OhNoitsJamie Talk 01:55, 2 November 2022 (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 sucks.

edit

My articles that is notable for WikiPedia is now being deleted for no reason. SMBMovieFan (talk) 23:19, 1 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

They're being deleted because they were created while you were evading your block. You cannot edit here, under any account or IP, while your original block is in place. Your edits under this account continued to be misguided as is evidenced by the messages on your talk page. This is just blatant disruption. The standard offer is your only option for a potential unblock, but is only applicable if you stop evading your block.-- Ponyobons mots 23:25, 1 November 2022 (UTC)Reply
Tzar, if you want to be unblocked then you have to log in to your original account and make the unblock request there. I don't remember what you did prior to getting blocked for WP:NOTHERE, however your edits on this account aren't bad (you have some great ideas, including that Wikiproject which I might propose a little later myself), it's just that you're socking. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 00:24, 2 November 2022 (UTC)Reply
@Blaze Wolf @Ponyo I logged into TzarN64 and submitted a unblock request. SMBMovieFan (talk) 01:11, 2 November 2022 (UTC)Reply
The standard offer still applies. You need to go at least 6 months without socking. Today is Day #1. Can you make it 6 more months? If so, you might have the opportunity to edit here again. But creating another sock just sets the clock back to 0 and more page deletions and reversions of your edits. Liz Read! Talk! 02:33, 2 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Blaze Wolf: I don't know how you can say "your edits on this account aren't bad" when we have this and this. Also, a whole series of edits like this shows a severe WP:COMPETENCE issue. SpinningSpark 09:19, 2 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

I'm sorry that I see the good in people instead of the bad. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 11:14, 2 November 2022 (UTC)Reply
If you're going to be providing advice to other editors, you should be able to see both the good and the bad or else you're providing false hope to someone who should not be unblocked. I immediately permablock editors for edits such as this, socking or not. -- Ponyobons mots 15:40, 2 November 2022 (UTC)Reply
I understand that, however not all of their edits were bad. I do not wish to continue this conversation further. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 15:41, 2 November 2022 (UTC)Reply