User talk:LoneWolf803

January 2024

Hello, LoneWolf803, welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. Your editing pattern indicates that you may be using multiple accounts or coordinating editing with people outside Wikipedia. Our policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow this, and users who misuse multiple accounts may be blocked from editing. If you operate multiple accounts directly or with the help of another person, please disclose these connections. Thank you. Jingiby (talk) 07:18, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

? How? LoneWolf803 (talk) 07:19, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you.Jingiby (talk) 07:44, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

If I did so, my apologies. LoneWolf803 (talk) 07:46, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

I am sorry, this above was my mistake. Jingiby (talk) 11:44, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

No worries, cheers! LoneWolf803 (talk) 11:50, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

February 2024

Hello, I'm Tdmurlock. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, LGBT people and Islam, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Tdmurlock (talk) 03:39, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

I apologize. LoneWolf803 (talk) 03:40, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Güzel Choice Awards moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Güzel Choice Awards. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Suntoloo Panoom (talk) 18:12, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Okay, thank you for letting me know. Cheers. LoneWolf803 (talk) 18:14, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Edit summaries

Hi LoneWolf803. Please use meaningful edit summaries when you contribute to Wikipedia. I have noticed you often use "mechanical" to describe your changes. This is not meaningful, and does not help other editors understand your changes without reviewing the diffs - defeating the purpose of an edit summary. Help:Edit summary has further guidance. Thanks. — Manticore 22:13, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

I apologize. The reason I used “mechanical” is simply to concisely and simply describe, well, mechanical (I.e. minor grammatical, spelling, phrasing changes.) What are some other edit summaries I could use while maintaining conciseness and simplicity? Thank you. LoneWolf803 (talk) 22:30, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

From the links on the help page I linked above, this list might be useful to you - Wikipedia:Edit summary legend. — Manticore 02:39, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Okay, thank you! I will take a look. I hope I am doing better now, going forward, I will be doing my best to use more specific and meaningful edit summaries, per Wikipedia standard. LoneWolf803 (talk) 04:36, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Blocked as a sockpuppet

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively as a sockpuppet of User:ByzantineIsNotRoman per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/ByzantineIsNotRoman. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

---

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

---

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

Spicy (talk) 15:57, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Block appeal

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).

LoneWolf803 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I do not understand what I did wrong. How was I tied to an account I have no relation to? If you look on my talk page, a while ago somebody suspected the same thing but corrected themselves soon after. I believe this is an error in the system or a mistake by a user. Please help! LoneWolf803 (talk) 16:43, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Decline reason:

This does not address the concerns raised at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/ByzantineIsNotRoman. Yamla (talk) 17:41, 30 March 2024 (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.

Block appeal again (having to use this because I cannot reply to either my talk page or the investigation page

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

LoneWolf803 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Concerns? What concerns exactly? I clicked the link and all I see for my “investigation” is “Likely” “blocked and tagged” what does that even mean? As I said, this must be an error in either the automated check user system or by an administrator. I see the accusation against me now, but cannot even reply to it to defend myself because I am blocked. Furthermore, I was given absolutely no notice that I was being investigated as a sockpuppet and thus had no ability to defend myself against the claim whatsoever. How can this be fair? Can you at least regrant me some editing privileges so I can defend myself with evidence and reason on the investigation page against this nonsense claim? LoneWolf803 (talk) 17:54, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Notes:

• In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
• Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=Concerns? What concerns exactly? I clicked the link and all I see for my “investigation” is “Likely” “blocked and tagged” what does that even mean? As I said, this must be an error in either the automated check user system or by an administrator. I see the accusation against me now, but cannot even reply to it to defend myself because I am blocked. Furthermore, I was given absolutely no notice that I was being investigated as a sockpuppet and thus had no ability to defend myself against the claim whatsoever. How can this be fair? Can you at least regrant me some editing privileges so I can defend myself with evidence and reason on the investigation page against this nonsense claim? [[User:LoneWolf803|LoneWolf803]] ([[User talk:LoneWolf803#top|talk]]) 17:54, 30 March 2024 (UTC) |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=Concerns? What concerns exactly? I clicked the link and all I see for my “investigation” is “Likely” “blocked and tagged” what does that even mean? As I said, this must be an error in either the automated check user system or by an administrator. I see the accusation against me now, but cannot even reply to it to defend myself because I am blocked. Furthermore, I was given absolutely no notice that I was being investigated as a sockpuppet and thus had no ability to defend myself against the claim whatsoever. How can this be fair? Can you at least regrant me some editing privileges so I can defend myself with evidence and reason on the investigation page against this nonsense claim? [[User:LoneWolf803|LoneWolf803]] ([[User talk:LoneWolf803#top|talk]]) 17:54, 30 March 2024 (UTC) |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=Concerns? What concerns exactly? I clicked the link and all I see for my “investigation” is “Likely” “blocked and tagged” what does that even mean? As I said, this must be an error in either the automated check user system or by an administrator. I see the accusation against me now, but cannot even reply to it to defend myself because I am blocked. Furthermore, I was given absolutely no notice that I was being investigated as a sockpuppet and thus had no ability to defend myself against the claim whatsoever. How can this be fair? Can you at least regrant me some editing privileges so I can defend myself with evidence and reason on the investigation page against this nonsense claim? [[User:LoneWolf803|LoneWolf803]] ([[User talk:LoneWolf803#top|talk]]) 17:54, 30 March 2024 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

LoneWolf803 (talk) 17:54, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Please help ASAP!

Izno can you please kindly help me with this? I have been unfairly and unjustly blocked as a sockpuppet despite no notice of investigation whatsoever, and Yamla told me that my block appeal “didn’t address the concerns raised at the investigation page.” Well I cannot address any concerns there as I cannot even reply on the investigation page to defend myself! This is utterly unfair and completely unjust. Any help would be appreciated. Please at least give me a chance to defend myself and make a reasonable argument. Thank you. LoneWolf803 (talk) 17:58, 30 March 2024 (UTC)