Jump to content

User talk:Bioforce12

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


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).

Bioforce12 (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

Hello Admin, I was BRAND NEW to the wikipedia community and was excited to jump in and get to know how things work. I thought the easiest way to get to know wikipedia policy was to add my comments to Afd pages. After making substantial edits over the last week and following up on pages to have conversations with other members, I left for a long holiday weekend and came back to my account blocked! It looks like I am accused of being someone else or having multiple accounts. I realized this by seeing all my comments are stricken from pages I was trying to improve and feel pretty demoralized. I would have thought that a wikipedia administrator could have messaged me or something before going straight for blocking me. I understand wikipedia probably gets a lot of people who cause problems online and its easier to block and have them appeal for their permissions back. I would like to confirm that I do not have multiple accounts or connections to the articles I have contributed to. I would like to please ask for my permissions back to continue learning how to best be a part of the wikipedia community. If I could also ask that my comments and edits be reinstated to pages I worked on that would be appreciated. If not, I understand admin is simply doing their best at maintaining wikipedia. Please let me know if any other steps can be taken on my part to continue as a member. Thank you for your time.

Decline reason:

This does not convince me there's zero relationship between the two accounts. You need to specifically address the concerns raised at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Milesr3/Archive. Yamla (talk) 17:06, 26 May 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.

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).

Bioforce12 (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

Thank you for your response and review Yamla. I also appreciate you posting the link to the concerns raised, I was not aware of these comments. To address Sam 2727's and others thoughts, I'll do my best with what I understand thus far. I seem to be accused to be someone else based off my comments that an Afd article should have been kept as I believed it had potential WP:HASPOT, then asking how it is understood that someone was paid. I guess I was simply looking for more information on the accusation as it was unclear to me as a new user how the Afd jumped so quickly to deletion based off of paid content. Reflecting back I can now see how a suspicion grew but I would say that this was the first time in my editing experience that I seen this WP:UPE. I did what any logical person would do and looked at the standard and it was totally unclear how it was related to this particular article. I proceeded to made my comments with the understanding that it was a community discussion so the worst that could happen would be that the admin would disagree with my comments and simply delete the article. I still stand by my comments to the article but its deleted now so I'm happy to move on. I hope that the proof in support of my unblocking is found in the previous work I have done for Wikipedia thus far and in the continued contributions I hope to add into the future. Please let me know if there are any other points I could make in support of my position. Thank you. Bioforce12 (talk) 19:17, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Sorry, not buying it. If you're not a sock puppet, you're a meat puppet. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:08, 5 June 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.

Your draft article, Draft:John Ninomiya

[edit]

Hello, Bioforce12. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "John Ninomiya".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 01:17, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]