User talk:50.0.121.102

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
  • You have been blocked from editing for one week for block evasion. If it happens again when this block expires, I'll block this IP again. Please don't take a self-requested block as a joke. Stop trying to edit. Bishonen | talk 13:20, 15 January 2014 (UTC).


  • Since you claim that my block is mistaken,[1] I've restored talkpage access so that you can post an unblock request to be reviewed by an uninvolved admin. You can use the template {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. For the record, I'm convinced that my block is correct. See contribs, and especially my own talkpage.
(Note: the one-week length is a compromise. I'd have blocked for two months, if I hadn't been a little worried that other users might edit from this IP. It seems unlikely, but better safe than sorry.) Bishonen | talk 13:58, 15 January 2014 (UTC).

erroneous block[edit]

Bishonen, thanks for restoring talk page access, though it would be nicer if you discussed this directly with me. But to whoever, here is an unblock template:

File:Orologio rosso or File:Orologio verde DOT SVG (red clock or green clock icon, from Wikimedia Commons)
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

50.0.121.102 (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribsdeleted contribsabuse filter logcreation logchange block settingsunblock)


Request reason:

I'm mistakenly blocked due to leaving a message on Bishonen's talk page leading her to think that I'm My Very Best Wishes, who is under a self-requested block. I had commented on the situation that led to MVBW's wikibreak/retirement and that led Bishonen to make a wrong inference. I'm not MVBW and I've been editing from this address for more than a month, while MVBW's self-requested block went into effect yesterday. I'm not familiar enough with MVBW's editing style to say for sure that s/he wouldn't have simultaneously edited from an account and an IP address for that long, or written this, but it would have been a pretty bogus misdirection as MVBW apparently speaks Russian and would have already known the info that I was asking for (but then managed to find myself). MVBW would also (I hope) not have left him/herself a suggestion on Bishonen's talkpage suggesting a possible publication outlet for the book he got in trouble over, etc. I'm not sure what else to add. I'd suggest emailing MVBW but I don't know what s/he could say if this isn't enough. 50.0.121.102 (talk) 14:18, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Accept reason:

I have looked at the editing history, and consulted the blocking administrator, and we have agreed that this IP address can be unblocked. I see no convincing evidence of any block evasion. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:15, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Unblocking administrator: Please check for active autoblocks on this user after accepting the unblock request.

SPI[edit]

If no one is going to do anything about the unblock request, I'd appreciate if someone could open an SPI against My Very Best Wishes and myself, and notify My Very Best Wishes if it's possible to do that. I'm not terribly bothered by being unable to edit (I'm not very active anyway) but it will be best for everyone concerned if this purported block evasion is cleared up.

FWIW, I've looked at some of MVBW's activity and I see a frustrated editor who's had some bad judgment at times, but I don't particularly see a game player. For my part, I'm a relatively restrained editor and haven't had problems quitting Wikipedia at the times when I've gotten burnt out. So I've never felt the need for a self-requested block. Thanks.

50.0.121.102 (talk) 19:30, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure that starting a sockpuppet investigation case would achieve anything. It would end with an administrator having to make a decision based on the evidence which is already available anyway, and it would cause a delay in getting the case settled. I have carefully examined the history of editing both from this IP address and from the "My Very Best Wishes" account, and I am close to making a decision, but I would prefer to see if the blocking administrator has anything to say before deciding definitely. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:04, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
I can understand the sense of frustration that led you to write "If no one is going to do anything about the unblock request...", but in fact you are not doing badly, getting some sort of response in less than 22 hours. It is by no means uncommon to see unblock requests waiting for attention for a week or more. I hope this matter will be settled one way or the other soon, but you may have to be patient for a while. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:38, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. I left a comment at Bishonen's talk. 50.0.121.102 (talk) 18:34, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked temporarily from editing for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

--Ymblanter (talk) 19:23, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Block evasion again. You just do not know when to stop. Please have a one week break from socking.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:24, 6 February 2014 (UTC)


File:Orologio rosso or File:Orologio verde DOT SVG (red clock or green clock icon, from Wikimedia Commons)
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

50.0.121.102 (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribsdeleted contribsabuse filter logcreation logchange block settingsunblock)


Request reason:

I am not evading any blocks and never have. Please see here. Added: wait, per the block log, you think I'm Mbz1? Are you kidding? Mbz1 edits about algebraic geometry[2] and geophysics[3]? I didn't follow Mbz1's antics that closely but I mostly remember her as battling over politics and economics articles. These aren't her areas at all. 50.0.121.102 (talk) 19:40, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Accept reason:

Indeed, my mistake, it is unlikely thi is Mbz1.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:56, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Unblocking administrator: Please check for active autoblocks on this user after accepting the unblock request.
Sorry, my mistake. But please never ever write in closed sections of AN and ANI again.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:53, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for your comment 50.0.121.102 and sorry it got you into troubles. I don't know who you are, and it makes your comment even more important for me.
Ymblanter, please check and recheck your facts before hitting your block button, and no, I am not evading my block. I have not harassed anybody, and until proven otherwise with valid evidence I cannot care less about your block. I am trying to make the so called Wikipedia community to treat human beings with dignity and with respect, and it is a Noble thing to do. BTW the contributions that this dynamic IP 76.126.140.135 made don't belong to me either. It is the first time I'm using this IP. 76.126.140.135 (talk) 22:27, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Ymblanter, belated thanks for the speedy response and unblock. Mbz1, I do have some sympathy for your situation, though your continuing to put your name on the site makes it harder to justify taking special measures to remove it. Note: due to some network maintenance earlier today (unrelated to any of the above discussions), my address has changed. 70.36.142.114 (talk) 05:02, 8 February 2014 (UTC) (was 50.0.121.102)