Jump to content

User talk:Willietell: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
AGF
coll old; msg
Line 9: Line 9:
|}
|}
|}<!--Template:Welcomeg-->
|}<!--Template:Welcomeg-->
{{hat|Block stuff}}

== I've been blocked because of a false accusation ==
== I've been blocked because of a false accusation ==


Line 16: Line 16:


{{unblock reviewed | 1=I've been blocked because of a false accusation of holding multiple accounts. [[User:Avraham|Avi]] I know that the relationship will "seem" to be a close one, as I have already explained to the parties involved in the interest of being open about the situation(posted on the talk page of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah%27s_Witnesses_beliefs) that a friend of mine, who shares similar views regarding the material on this website decided to create their own account and submit the request for deletion of the page after I told them I was undecided on whether it was worth effort to do so. They, in my home, on my computer, took it upon themselves, over my objections, to do this. Your reasoning that I would in any way NEED to create a GHOST account to do this is illogical at best, since I hadn't even created an account myself at this particular time and only really did so because I felt that if my friend would go to such effort, then I might as well continue the process of attempting to make honest and reliable changes to the site in question. I let the people on the page know that a friend created an account and finished the request for deletion, so there was no attempt at deception involved, everything has been open and honest, please look at the talk page and you will see that this is true. Again, no attempt at deception was involved and from what i read at [[WP:sock]], the rule seems to attempt to eliminate attempts at deception, which hasn't ever been in question here, since I explained to them the situation up front. I don't have multiple accounts, only this one and as far as I can tell from the rules, there is no rule that states that two users may not utilize the same computer. As for whether my friend will ever choose to use the <span id="Spudpicker 01">[[::User:Spudpicker 01|Spudpicker 01]] <span class="plainlinks " >([[::User talk:Spudpicker 01|talk]] '''·''' [[::Special:Contributions/Spudpicker 01|contribs]])</span></span> account again or not, I really can't tell you, because I am not him and don't make decisions for him, However you are depriving me of using an account I set up because the other editors requested I set one up and after doing so, this is the result. I would respectfully request that you reconsider your decision, as you haven't really examined all the facts or considered all the relevant information.[[User:Willietell|Willietell]] ([[User talk:Willietell#top|talk]]) 18:04, 15 December 2011 (UTC) | accept= OK. I will assume good faith, give you the benefit of the doubt, and unblock this account, leaving Spudpicker 01 blocked. However, please be ''very'' careful as to whom you allow to use your computer and login in the future, as this excuse will probably not work a second time. Good Luck. -- [[User:Avraham|Avi]] ([[User talk:Avraham|talk]]) 18:29, 15 December 2011 (UTC)}}
{{unblock reviewed | 1=I've been blocked because of a false accusation of holding multiple accounts. [[User:Avraham|Avi]] I know that the relationship will "seem" to be a close one, as I have already explained to the parties involved in the interest of being open about the situation(posted on the talk page of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah%27s_Witnesses_beliefs) that a friend of mine, who shares similar views regarding the material on this website decided to create their own account and submit the request for deletion of the page after I told them I was undecided on whether it was worth effort to do so. They, in my home, on my computer, took it upon themselves, over my objections, to do this. Your reasoning that I would in any way NEED to create a GHOST account to do this is illogical at best, since I hadn't even created an account myself at this particular time and only really did so because I felt that if my friend would go to such effort, then I might as well continue the process of attempting to make honest and reliable changes to the site in question. I let the people on the page know that a friend created an account and finished the request for deletion, so there was no attempt at deception involved, everything has been open and honest, please look at the talk page and you will see that this is true. Again, no attempt at deception was involved and from what i read at [[WP:sock]], the rule seems to attempt to eliminate attempts at deception, which hasn't ever been in question here, since I explained to them the situation up front. I don't have multiple accounts, only this one and as far as I can tell from the rules, there is no rule that states that two users may not utilize the same computer. As for whether my friend will ever choose to use the <span id="Spudpicker 01">[[::User:Spudpicker 01|Spudpicker 01]] <span class="plainlinks " >([[::User talk:Spudpicker 01|talk]] '''·''' [[::Special:Contributions/Spudpicker 01|contribs]])</span></span> account again or not, I really can't tell you, because I am not him and don't make decisions for him, However you are depriving me of using an account I set up because the other editors requested I set one up and after doing so, this is the result. I would respectfully request that you reconsider your decision, as you haven't really examined all the facts or considered all the relevant information.[[User:Willietell|Willietell]] ([[User talk:Willietell#top|talk]]) 18:04, 15 December 2011 (UTC) | accept= OK. I will assume good faith, give you the benefit of the doubt, and unblock this account, leaving Spudpicker 01 blocked. However, please be ''very'' careful as to whom you allow to use your computer and login in the future, as this excuse will probably not work a second time. Good Luck. -- [[User:Avraham|Avi]] ([[User talk:Avraham|talk]]) 18:29, 15 December 2011 (UTC)}}
{{hab}}
Willietell, I'm happy you got it sorted; I've collaped the above mesages. If the block was not correct, I'm truly sorry. I hope you'll prove me right, and do good things. Best of luck to you, <small><span style="border:1px solid;background:#00008B">[[User:Chzz|'''<span style="background:#00008B;color:white">&nbsp;Chzz&nbsp;</span>''']][[User talk:Chzz|<span style="color:#00008B;background-color:yellow;">&nbsp;►&nbsp;</span>]]</span></small> 21:35, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:35, 15 December 2011

Welcome!

Hello, Willietell and Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking if shown; this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field with your edits. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Dougweller (talk) 07:16, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Getting started
Getting help
Policies and guidelines

The community

Writing articles
Miscellaneous
Block stuff
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

I've been blocked because of a false accusation

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).

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


Request reason:

I've been blocked because of a false accusation of holding multiple accounts from a group of very hostile editors consisting of the following editors (Jeffro77, BlackCab, Vyselink, Dougweller. who have exercised a campaign of hostility since I edited a page on bible chronology and another one on Jehovah's Witnesses beliefs. After I requested that the page on Jehovah's Witnesses beliefs be deleted because it is written is an inaccurate and hostile manner, they have become even more obtuse. I was banned without even any notification of a problem, is this the way things are done on Wikipedia? What can I do to rectify this, or is it simply more logical to create a new account since I have only held an account for a few days now anyway? As I am new to Wikipedia, I am unsure of exactly how to proceed, please help. Thanks. Additionally, I would like to receive specific, detailed instruction on how I proceed with filing a complaint against these four editors for the way they have dealt with me in what I feel is an act of gross misconduct, for which I personally feel that all four editors should be permanently banned from Wikipedia. Three of these editors have demonstrated WP: coi in editing pages that claim to dispense information regarding the beliefs and doctrine of Jehovah's Witnesses, but do so in a negative manner with little regard for the actual truth. I tried to discuss the pages with the editors in question, but was met with little more than hostility from a mob mindset in return. The "Leader of the band" so to speak, appears to be Jeffro77, with Vyselink and Blackcab as his lieutenants. DougWeller seems to be involved to a lesser degree, and is perhaps an innocent victim of circumstance, but I have a feeling that he is actually involved, this I have included his username as well. Please refer to the talk pages of the Wikipedia articles listed, Thank you. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Development_of_Jehovah%27s_Witnesses_doctrine http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah%27s_Witnesses_beliefs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronology_of_the_Bible

Decline reason:

Currently available technical and behavioral evidence indicates a strong relationship between this user and Spudpicker 01 (talk · contribs). Using multiple accounts to imply more support for a position than actually exists is a very severe violation of WIkipedia's policies and guidelines. The account created first has been blocked for a week, and this account should remain indefinitely blocked, unless the user wishes, after serving the block and committing to no longer abuse the multiple-account privilege, to use this as the single account, then the other can be indeffed instead. -- Avi (talk) 17:12, 15 December 2011 (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 accepted the request.

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


Request reason:

I've been blocked because of a false accusation of holding multiple accounts. Avi I know that the relationship will "seem" to be a close one, as I have already explained to the parties involved in the interest of being open about the situation(posted on the talk page of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah%27s_Witnesses_beliefs) that a friend of mine, who shares similar views regarding the material on this website decided to create their own account and submit the request for deletion of the page after I told them I was undecided on whether it was worth effort to do so. They, in my home, on my computer, took it upon themselves, over my objections, to do this. Your reasoning that I would in any way NEED to create a GHOST account to do this is illogical at best, since I hadn't even created an account myself at this particular time and only really did so because I felt that if my friend would go to such effort, then I might as well continue the process of attempting to make honest and reliable changes to the site in question. I let the people on the page know that a friend created an account and finished the request for deletion, so there was no attempt at deception involved, everything has been open and honest, please look at the talk page and you will see that this is true. Again, no attempt at deception was involved and from what i read at WP:sock, the rule seems to attempt to eliminate attempts at deception, which hasn't ever been in question here, since I explained to them the situation up front. I don't have multiple accounts, only this one and as far as I can tell from the rules, there is no rule that states that two users may not utilize the same computer. As for whether my friend will ever choose to use the [[::User:Spudpicker 01|Spudpicker 01]] ([[::User talk:Spudpicker 01|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Spudpicker 01|contribs]]) account again or not, I really can't tell you, because I am not him and don't make decisions for him, However you are depriving me of using an account I set up because the other editors requested I set one up and after doing so, this is the result. I would respectfully request that you reconsider your decision, as you haven't really examined all the facts or considered all the relevant information.Willietell (talk) 18:04, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

OK. I will assume good faith, give you the benefit of the doubt, and unblock this account, leaving Spudpicker 01 blocked. However, please be very careful as to whom you allow to use your computer and login in the future, as this excuse will probably not work a second time. Good Luck. -- Avi (talk) 18:29, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Willietell, I'm happy you got it sorted; I've collaped the above mesages. If the block was not correct, I'm truly sorry. I hope you'll prove me right, and do good things. Best of luck to you,  Chzz  ►  21:35, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]