Wikihelper751

January 2017

Hello, I'm McGeddon. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Chess.com, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source, so I removed it. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! McGeddon (talk) 19:31, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Per WP:V, "any material whose verifiability has been challenged or is likely to be challenged" should include a citation. --McGeddon (talk) 19:40, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

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).

Wikihelper751 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

says I am a sockpuppet when this is my first and only account and all I have done is add information :(

Decline reason:

You must think we are idiots. We aren't. Yamla (talk) 19:44, 28 January 2017 (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 declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Wikihelper751 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I'm sure you can see I am editing from London and am not using any kind of proxy so how you can claim I am macer75 on the other side of the world... Yes, I made a few bad edits and am very sorry but only did it a couple of times and am friends with some other people via chess.com who did worse. Please unblock me and I promise only to make useful contributions in future.

Decline reason:

I don't have the ability to see your IP address (only those with Checkuser rights can do that), but there are many ways to edit from different geolocations. If you make a new request, at the minimum I'd say you need to provide a convincing explanation for this. And out of interest, how do you know where User:Macer75 is? Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 22:06, 29 January 2017 (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 declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Wikihelper751 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Well, I'm kinda friends with macer75 through chess.com and he encouraged me to edit the chess.com page. I can email a screenshot of the private forum he created there if it helps, and ask him to not make stupid edits anymore. I know he lives somewhere in the US, nothing more specific

Decline reason:

I don't see a single constructive edit in your contributions, in this situation I see no point in trying to figure out whether you're a sockpuppet, or a meatpuppet, or whatever. I believe that this account is better off blocked. Max Semenik (talk) 00:39, 4 February 2017 (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.

Note that this is an admission of violations of WP:SOCK (specifically, WP:MEAT). --Yamla (talk) 13:01, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

I offered to help by asking the original vandaliser to stop, considering I know him well. You just seem to want to make the problem worse. Wikihelper751

How on earth was this edit in any way helpful?!? --Yamla (talk) 19:33, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

That's why I said I was sorry. If you followed Wikipedia policy as you should, it says to give more chances if the user recognises it was disruptive and agrees not to do again. - Wikihelper751

Well, are you going to unblock me please?. As I say I'm sorry for making that bad edit on chess.com page changing the link to someone very well known, who has made 17,000 posts in chess.com, and it's clear that I am not him. Please lift the ban and I promise to make helpful contributions. Bans aren't meant to be as punishments and you can watch me as closely as you like. - Wikihelper751

This is Macer75 here. I did not encourage anyone to edit the chess.com page; in fact, in the private forum I specifically told people not to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LenaDunhamFan (talk • contribs) 22:03, 30 January 2017 (UTC)