User talk:Aramsuryoyo

November 2014

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Your recent talk page comments on Talk:Syriac people were not added to the bottom of the thread. New discussion page messages should always be added to the bottom. Your message may have been moved by another user. For more details see the talk page guidelines. Thank you. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:27, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet of Sr 76 (talk · contribs · global contribs · page moves · user creation · block log) that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Mike V • Talk 02:46, 27 November 2014 (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).

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

Request reason:

I am not a sock puppet. I am Syrian Aramean. I have studied my history in great detail both from a western and eastern perspective. I am deeply offended by being labeled an "Assyrian" with no valid proof or evidence by others for nothing more that political gain. I am offended that others have the right to label me an my people with an identity that you are now not letting me defend. I am insulted that you are claiming that I do not have a valid opinion as an individual. My understanding was that a consensus was required and that a consensus is based on open discussions of the topic at hand, yet I have been block for expressing my opinion. I would like to understand what the basis for your assumption of me being a sock puppet is, and how the decision was reached? Aramsuryoyo (talk) 22:32, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you

understand what you have been blocked for,
will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. only (talk) 00:01, 7 December 2014 (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.

The basis is a checkuser investigation. As the block was levied as a result of a checkuser, it cannot be contested by normal administrators - only other checkusers. —Jeremy v^_^v ^Bori! 23:35, 6 December 2014 (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).

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

Request reason:

I only have one account. I do not know who SR76 is.

Decline reason:

If a group of editors are editing the Mexico article, and their underlying IP addresses all originate from Mexico that proves nothing. However, if they all come from Cairo, then it is fairly likely they are connected. On this basis, having reviewed the checkuser data, I am declining your request to be unblocked. PhilKnight (talk) 08:00, 23 December 2014 (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).

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

Request reason:

Hi Phil, I understand the Check user IP process and your logic, but it does not apply. We the Syriac/Aramean people are the natives of Middle East and have for the past centuries been persecuted and expelled from our native homeland. The majority of our people have migrated to Sweeden/Germany, the US and Australia. So any Check IP process applied to contributors of the English version of the Syriac pages will always show a high concentration of contributions from the US or Australia.

Decline reason:

The evidence was much more specific than "they're all from two large countries". Huon (talk) 03:32, 24 December 2014 (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.

Surya Majapahit

art thou from Suryoyo Majapahito? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.63.34.82 (talk) 14:14, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]