Jump to content

User talk:Boxer4215

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

Welcome!

[edit]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia
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).

Boxer4215 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

My editing philosophy: Our readers do not care one whit who adds information to articles; they care only that the information is correct.

Decline reason:

That isn't a valid reason for unblocking. Many readers do not even know who adds info. The active members of the Wikipedia community do care about it. Peridon (talk) 15:30, 20 February 2017 (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 Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Garchy (talk) 16:15, 17 January 2017 (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).

Boxer4215 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Yes it is? Why am I being blocked, I have only ever added valid information to Wikipedia. Please explicitly show any information that I have valid is not inline with wikipedia's terms. This sock puppet stuff is nonsense.

Decline reason:

See the section below for the reason why you are blocked, and please be sure to address it in any future unblock request. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:03, 22 February 2017 (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).

Boxer4215 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Thank you, Boing! said Zebedee. Firstly, I did see the SockPuppetry investigation, however, I have not taken part in any SockPuppetry and have only ever added valid, accurate information to Wikipedia. I seem to have simply been caught up in some sort of conspiracy. Secondly, If I understand correctly, Lars Kroijer has been deleted due to it not being entirely encyclopedic. Well, all I can say is that that is due to me being relatively new to the wikipedia community, and not quite figuring out the encyclopedic language yet. If you that read it, you can see that it is an honest attempt. This cannot be valid reason for blocking, as how else would users in the community learn?

Decline reason:

Okay, now you're wasting our time with conspiracy claims. Talk page access revoked. Max Semenik (talk) 18:55, 22 February 2017 (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.

  • Has this been confirmed as a sockpuppet? I'm not intricately involved in this case, but the behavioral patterns of this user (taken into account the edit filter as well) does not clearly look like a puppet. I also noticed that this user has been suspected as "likely", but has not been confirmed. Could it be possible this is actually a new user who somehow got wrapped up in this accidentally? Or is there more information that I'm missing? As it looks right now this is certainly not a cut and dry case, nor has this user abused their unblock requests. Garchy (talk) 20:02, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • @MaxSem: Do you happen to have more information about this case, and whether this has been a confirmed sock by a CU?
According to WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Brilbluterin, this is 'Likely' to be a sock of that user, and 'technically related' to another sockmaster who is indeffed and banned. When a CU says 'likely', it's stronger than when you or I say it. A 'likely' is usually taken to be a confirmation, and the 'technically related' does their case no good either. (A 'possible' would indicate similarities, but not 100%, and behaviour then gets taken into account. I'm not a CU, but that's how I understand their replies as seen over the years. The CUs look at info that most people don't even know can be read remotely or left on sites visited as log info.) Peridon (talk) 17:27, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry case

[edit]

Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Brilbluterin for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. Thank you. Wikipediauser123456 (talk) 17:12, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Lars Kroijer

[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Lars Kroijer, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Brianhe (talk) 19:28, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Boxer4215&oldid=767228342"