User talk:CSXTrainBoy815

Sources

Please read WP:RS to understand why some of your recent edits have been reverted. Reliable sources are necessary when adding information that might be challenged. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:12, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

April 2018

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. 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.

— Berean Hunter (talk) 02:18, 11 April 2018 (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).

CSXTrainBoy815 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Why was I blocked? I didn’t even do any sort of Disruptive editing. Although I’m aware of a lot the vandalism involved recently but I have nothing to do with it. You can check my contributions page and you can see that I have always made constructive edits and not once any of my edits were marked as vandalism.

Decline reason:

You know why you are blocked. WP:EVADE. Yamla (talk) 11:25, 11 April 2018 (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).

CSXTrainBoy815 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I understand some ip addresses I connected to might’ve been used to vandalize articles but I never edit any articles that are meant to be vandalized. As I said, you can check my contributions page to see what articles I’ve edited and they were all legitimate editing. If it’s the other people using the IP address, you should punish the ip only, not accounts. BTW, the person you’ve related me to, I have no clue who this is. I saw after the protection was placed on E. Hunter Harrison’s page, I just made a quick grammar fix. Not intended to add any more vandalism to the page.

Decline reason:

You may want to read about how WP:CHECKUSER works. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:24, 11 April 2018 (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.

If you file another unblock request, please make sure that you give the checkusers your permission to discuss your IPs openly here. Your actions as an IP sock were to edit war while logged out on articles that you have edited.
— Berean Hunter (talk) 14:56, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It’s whatever, I guess, I’ll take the block. I don’t see why I’m being accused but whatever. How long is the duration of this block? I know it’s indefinite but how long would it be usually if the abuse was to completely end.

Here are a few suggestions that would increase the likelihood of a shorter block (1) stop lying (2) explicitly agree to stop adding blatant attacks and other opinions to articles. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 16:30, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We would have to discuss your work logged out in order to discuss block duration. You don't see why you are being accused because you have avoided giving checkusers permission to discuss your IP activities.
— Berean Hunter (talk) 18:30, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Here ya go, it's time to tell the truth. I admit that I have been a sockpuppet to add my opinions to various articles. With this in mind, I give permission for the checkusers to discuss an IPs on here. With that being said, I apologize for all the disruptive edits I have caused on wikipedia. And as per Ohnoitsjamie's request, I explicitly agree to stop adding blatant attacks and other opinions to various articles. I am such an idiot for thinking of even doing this. I would assure you that once all the blocks have expired, no more sort of vandalism or any other disruptive edits will be made, at least from me. As for the username you related me to, I saw he made threats to wikipedia and honestly think he should be banned. Again, I apologize for all this disruption. It was time to open up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CSXTrainBoy815 (talk • contribs) 19:30, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]