User talk:IBurnTrees

Blocked as a sockpuppet

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:MapleviewLounge per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/MapleviewLounge. 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 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 ~~~~}}. GeneralNotability (talk) 00:29, 8 December 2022 (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).

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

Request reason:

Im using the same internet as another user mapleview who I was trying to help of my own volition. mapleview expressed issues with a page he spent a lot of time working on being deleted and i thought i could help by making a second account to help them. ban me instead of mapleview please as they didn't know what i did until they just told me they were banned. IBurnTrees (talk) 01:53, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You created this account and edited the article before I nominated it for deletion, so that explanation doesn't make sense. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 04:58, 8 December 2022 (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).

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

Request reason:

if we consider the facts at hand 1. i share an IP with someone whos internet i use and that's not against the rules. 2. we've admitted to not being each other. 3. my spare account was literally only used for some edits made about a small airport which is completely allowed. then i shouldn't be banned. yes, i voted to 'keep' on a page i personally didn't believe should be taken down but i still have no conflict with the person the page is about and fully believe it should be up. is the friend of a page author supposed to disclose that as a COI? I actually do not know but i do know that i am not a sock of mapleview. canna nerd is my sock. maple is innocent even though they're guilty of prematurely making a wiki page for some lmfao butttt they are my friend so obviously, I'm gonna have their back. block me or unblock me just know all i wanted was to help a homie IBurnTrees (talk) 06:18, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You both write in the same style. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:45, 8 December 2022 (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).

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

Request reason:

am not sure if this is the right way to directly address ninja robot pirate(amazing username btw) and i mean this respectfully but isn't it sort of common knowledge that people talk, text, and sound like the people they associate with the most? especially ones in real life and off of the internet...? other than that using your claim to block someone is purely conjecture and if it wouldn't be a solid argument in the court system why would it be for Wikipedia? i am sorry for getting on yalls bad side and for not disclosing that I knew the author of the page but I don't think any of that warrants blocking me.... IBurnTrees (talk) 07:06, 8 December 2022 (UTC) [reply]

Decline reason:

Because Wikipedia is not a court, that's why. Courts exist, among other things, to allow you the chance to protect yourself against abuses of power by the government. Wikipedia is not part of the government; it is a privately operated website. And private property owners are allowed to make what rules for the use of their property they deem sufficient, and such processes as they deem due those users. And our sockpuppetry policies are meant first and foremost to protect the encyclopedia, not any rights you may believe you have. — Daniel Case (talk) 07:55, 8 December 2022 (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.