User talk:ANNA E PARK

ANNA E PARK, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi ANNA E PARK! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Jtmorgan (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:04, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Woody Pak for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Woody Pak is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Woody Pak until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 14:24, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your your notice. I will join the discussion to see what Issues are of concern. ANNA E PARK (talk) 14:29, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for abusing multiple accounts per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/ANNA E PARK. 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. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Cabayi (talk) 17:05, 21 December 2020 (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).

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

Request reason:

I apologize for violating the policies of Wikipedia in using multiple accounts illegitimately.
My intentions were only to be efficacious in changing the Woody Pak article's AfD status.
It was misguided and wrong to do so. I should have let the evidence speak for itself, which I hope it did.
I will discontinue usage of multiple accounts for the illegitimate reasons re:sock puppetry
I have been learning "on the fly" so to speak about the rules and methods (in particular the coding parts!) of Wikipedia.
This is well reflected in the logs no doubt. It demonstrates that I am responsive and mindful of corrections and reprimands.
Of course in this case of sock puppetry my desire for a quick resolution of the Woody Pak AfD unfortunately over rided my better judgement. Again for this I apologize.
I want to be a productive and abiding contributor to Wikipedia and will better research the rules and regulations.
Please unblock me so I can continue to offer more evidence to over ride the Woody Pak AfD in a timely manner and also continue to improve the article itself.
Thank you for your consideration and most importantly the valuable admonitions that will ensure better practices in the future

ANNA E PARK (talk) 00:52, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Decline reason:

It is not the case that your intentions were good. They clearly weren't. Your intentions were to mislead us and falsely claim to be three independent editors. You are exceptionally lucky you were blocked for only a week after pulling that stunt. When someone works as hard as you did to demonstrate you cannot be trusted, we tend to believe you. I recommend waiting out the one week block and taking this time to decide if you plan to be honest with us in the future. Yamla (talk) 11:14, 22 December 2020 (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.