User talk:Bujawarat

Your use of multiple Wikipedia accounts

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/Darmahjgari, 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.

Thomas.W (talk) 12:47, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

may i be unblocked because i am definitely not using sockpuppetry we all happen to share the same wifi and errors in another users computer so maybe he or she has been deliberately destroying wikipedia pages. Thank you sir

Decline reason:

Checkuser has detected at least 33 counts which locate to you. Errors in a computer will not destroy wikipedia pages. An admin without checkuser ability will not unblock you; you have the option of e-mailing the blocking admin, whose name you can see on your block message.--Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 15:24, 15 April 2013 (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 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).

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

Request reason:

is there a way at least for you to improve photos in wikipedia pdf files

Decline reason:

Not an unblock request -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:45, 15 April 2013 (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.

Is that why you're constantly changing image sizes? Our image sizes are set for optimal viewing online, the way the overwhelming majority of people view the encyclopedia, not for the pdf versions of pages. I know very little about the conversion process from online to pdf, but modifying articles is definitely not the way to go about it. —DoRD (talk) 15:45, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be darned. I would never have been able to figure out that that's why he's been doing it. But it explains why he on some pages has selfreverted to the original image size just a couple of minutes after increasing the size of it, just enough time for him to create a pdf of the article. Thomas.W (talk) 15:49, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- It does confirm the socking, despite the denials in the first unblock request. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:54, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh sorry about that i only thought my edits would only appear like that to our ip address. Damn it now im block forever. Sorry though for having ruined the pages, for a long time i didnt realize what my disruptive edits were until you pointed it out. Sorry though but if there is a way of improving pdf photos, do tell

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).

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

Request reason:

h sorry about that i only thought my edits would only appear like that to our ip address. Damn it now im block forever. Sorry though for having ruined the pages, for a long time i didnt realize what my disruptive edits were until you pointed it out. Sorry though but if there is a way of improving pdf photos, do tell, and please unblock me i PROMISE not to ruin wikipedia to it ever again and i hope you understand because im a new member so im not really techy thank you

Decline reason:

Sorry, none of this explains the 30-odd accounts. I'm not sure what your contributions would be if unblocked, at any rate. Kuru (talk) 13:41, 20 April 2013 (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.