User talk:MM 9004

Welcome!

Hello, MM 9004, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Quinton Feldberg (talk) 16:19, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet of CadAPL (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · logs · block log · arb · rfc · lta · SPI · cuwiki) that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is 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 first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:52, 7 August 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).

MM 9004 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Who the hell is that (CadAPL) ?! I was reverting vandalism happened to a certain page which shows correct information ! so why should I be banned indefinitely ? MM 9004 (talk) 16:13, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

That's the username of another account that shares your technical information and your interests, as does User:Amorite Mercenary. Using multiple accounts to evade a block is not permitted. Huon (talk) 21:01, 7 August 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).

MM 9004 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Who the hell are these people?? I had checked the articles with the provided information and I found them reliable so I undid the recent edits ! I wonder why that admin thought that I am related to that mercenary or something ! I hope that you take into consideration all the edits I have done so far in that you would notice that I dont disrupt articles, on the contrary I positively contribute ! Any meaningless accusations regarding socks and puppets is not acceptable ! This is my personal account in which I use an ip of a residence compound, so it might be anyone here misusing his account, it is not my problem ! MM 9004 (talk) 2:13 am, 8 August 2017, last Tuesday (3 days ago) (UTC+2)

Decline reason:

The evidence confirms that this is indeed a sockpuppet account. Vanjagenije (talk) 20:19, 11 August 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.

Checkuser needed: I'm not sure if this account was checked, I can't find any such notice. If not, can this be compare to the master? Vanjagenije (talk) 23:17, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to say Unlikely based on geolocation. Stranger things have happened but I don't think this is the block target. Katie^talk 03:03, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@NinjaRobotPirate: Are you still convinced about sockpuppetry? Can you show me some evidence? Vanjagenije (talk) 08:09, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah, I'm sure it's him. See, for example, [1] and [2]. Following this block, several IP socks from around the world appeared and edit warred for the same content, using similar edit summaries: [3] (Japan), [4] (Thailand). Another one used the similar edit summaries to post a complaint to ANI: [5] (United Kingdom). This same IP then posted pornographic image vandalism to both my user talk page and Drmies' in retaliation for blocking the previous IP addresses. Ponyo might be able to give more details about this sock, as she was involved in a CU block on one of the accounts. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:42, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

NinjaRobotPirate is right. The geolocation is useless in this case since previous socks were editing from multiple continents minutes apart even though the IPs showed no evidence of being open proxies. This obviously blunts the technical data and puts the onus on behaviour and given that this "new" account just happens to be restoring Amorite Mercenary's edits and has the same idiosyncratic writing style with a very obvious tell (email me if you don't see it), I have no doubt this is a sock.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 17:24, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder why you block people in the first place ! you accuse people of being socks and puppets, which is very disrespectful, then you block them indefinitely if they have a registered account ! To be honest, I have checked that mercenary account and I found that he/she is not misusing his/her account. He/She was accused of being a sock puppet of other accounts, shocking ! so we can tell that there is a pattern here of blocking people from editing the free wikipedia ! if this place is so strict, why do you let people to edit in the first place ? you block people if they argue with the admins not because they are vandalizing the articles ! I simple edited a page about an actress which I saw a video about then I checked her wiki page, I found that the last edit was reverted by an admin because the last editor was a "sock" (it is not offensive to call people socks and puppets for wiki admins! But it is right to block accounts indefinitely if they harm an admin feeling).

I dont agree with that person who used unregistered accounts to attack that admin, that is totally wrong and indecent .. but I can tell that if he/she is related to the mercenary account, he/she should be really mad at the "unfair" treatment he/she received, because it seems that you simply block people who use the same IP by accusing them of evading blocks through creating new account which means that he/she as a PERSON is not accepted to contribute here regardless of his/her efforts !

I went further to check the accounts which you accuse him/her to be related to, and I found that they had "arguments with the admins" not just simply repeatedly undo certain edits as that unregistered ips did ! That indicates that it is better to vandalize a certain page instead of arguing with a certain admin who would keep your account on his/her watchlist to eventually block you for no reason more than simply being a puppet !

I can simply go to a public place and do edits as much as I want without being tracked by the wiki admins, but I chose the other way which is using a registered account to track my edits from being vandalized by other people ! but it seems having a registered account is worse than having an ip defining your edits, because eventually you would be accused of being a sock of someone else !

You can take whatever decision you like here, I asked to have a registered account but I got blocked at once, so why should I waste my time to find references and edit articles if I am not welcomed as a "person" by the subjective admins ! You accused me of having the same "idiosyncratic writing style" with that blocked account, I dont know how you managed to figure that out !

Anyway, editing here is just a hobby for me. I study two masters in economics and history, and I am not concerned if I am blocked to edit a page about an actress called Amal Arafa ! what would that add to my CV ? nothing !

I hope that you all have a good and healthy life, I am not here to bother anyone or spread fake news about people.

I can tell you that as admins, you should watch the edits itself and not holding grudge against people on here, because you are not our employers, and we get zero money from our contribution ! MM 9004 (talk) 20:51, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]