User talk:Aalaan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Blocked for sockpuppetry[edit]

File:Orologio rosso or File:Orologio verde DOT SVG (red clock or green clock icon, from Wikimedia Commons)
This blocked 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). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

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


Request reason:

I apologize for what I did and will not do it again. So please unblock my account as I had it since 2006. Since I had this account for sometime I now wish to make real productive contributions. Thank you User:Aalaan (talk) 11:08, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Decline reason:

It is suggested that you have edited using at least two named accounts and at least three IP addresses. This is why you are blocked and this is the point which any further unblock request must address. A simple apology is welcome but is not sufficient. --Anthony Bradbury"talk" 12:42, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first and then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page for as long as you are blocked.

File:Orologio rosso or File:Orologio verde DOT SVG (red clock or green clock icon, from Wikimedia Commons)
This blocked 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). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

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


Request reason:

I understand why I was blocked. I am not going to make arguments like the block was unfair or anything like that. I admit I deserve the block. But now I have changed. I gurantee that I will not repeat this behaviour anymore. The user who originally started the block said I am alright now https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Fazlur_Khan#Block_evasion Aalaan (talk) 16:40, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Decline reason:

You say "But now I have changed. I gurantee [sic] that I will not repeat this behaviour anymore." However, you omit to mention that you have recently been evading your block using numerous IP addresses to do so (14 that I am aware of), that you have been making contentious edits, and reverting any other editors that you disagree with, showing ownership attitude to an article (instructing other editors to stop editing it), attempting to get other editors to make edits for you (in other words asking them to help you evade your block by proxy), etc etc. You also omit to mention that following the decline of your last block, you just evaded it, and only made a second unblock request when articles that you had been disruptively editing had been semi-protected. No, I'm afraid I see no evidence at all that you have changed and won't repeat your disruptive behaviour, and it is clear that unblocking you would not be to the advantage of the project. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 10:18, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first and then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page for as long as you are blocked.

The talk page thread mentioned above has now been deleted, but it's here for reference. (I'm the user who Aalaan refers to - I filed the original sockpuppet investigation request, but didn't block him. At no point do I say that Aalaan is "alright now".) --McGeddon (talk) 10:09, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
  • For the record, the number of IP addresses that I know of that you have recently used to evade the block now stands at 24, but there may well be more. I have also discovered further types of abusive editing, including removing at least one post about your disruptive editing from at least one article talk page, evidently in an attempt to hide evidence. It is most unfortunate that in the IP ranges that you have used, there is a very small number of constructive edits by other editors in among the far larger number of edits from you, so that any range block will inevitably run the risk of some collateral damage. The articles where you have been most disruptive are semi-protected for a short while: they will be semi-protected for much longer if you continue. Please don't make that necessary, as it makes it harder for constructive editors to contribute, as well as stopping your disruption. Other pages where you have been disruptive may be protected if you continue. Please don't make that necessary, as it makes it harder for constructive editors to contribute, as well as stopping your disruption. IP ranges that you have used will now be blocked for a short while, and they can be blocked for longer if you make it necessary. Please don't make that necessary, as it makes it harder for constructive editors to contribute, as well as stopping your disruption. If you use other IP ranges then they can be blocked too, but naturally I hope that won't be necessary. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 10:43, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Sockpuppet investigation[edit]

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Aalaan, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

McGeddon (talk) 08:00, 11 July 2014 (UTC)