User talk:Mobberjoe
Important Notice
[edit]
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
RegentsPark (comment) 15:55, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
Blocked as a sockpuppet
[edit]
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.
Mobberjoe (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
why am I being Labelled as a sock puppet? I dont have any connections with this odinson guy. Please can you actually give me some proper reason for this ban, also the krrish article I edited has been backed with sources,if you are banning me for that, then I would like a proper explanation. Also I'm from India and I have seen @fowler&fowler being biased on multiple Indian articles ;for example: fowler allowed the removal of the maximum extent of the maurya empire in the Maurya empire article without any proper reason,and then made excuses even though the article never mentions about the exact timeline of the extent,only the maximum extent is displayed which could be from any time period,but he still allowed it. ,hence the reason for this debate,now whether I'm wrong or right about that accusation is upto debate,but that is reason for that comment on the Kashmiri files page. please help! Mobberjoe (talk) 10:31, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
Decline reason:
The reason for the ban is clearly stated above and at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Odinson878. Yamla (talk) 12:28, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
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.
Mobberjoe (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
"The reason for the ban is clearly stated above and at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Odinson878" That reason is pretty vague. The connection is made because of my suggestion of an image change at the Thor page and knowing who @fowler&fowler is.which is purely coincidental and could happen to anyone,fowler &fowler is a very well known Wikipedia editor so a lot of people would definitely know him(including me),it's not a very unique reason,I have seen fowler &fowler debating multiple editors on multiple Wikipedia articles such as the [India] article,the [Maurya empire]] article etc. I haven't vandalised anything,so why am I being banned? Mobberjoe (talk) 03:57, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Because we block people for a lot of other things besides vandalism. Like ... sockpuppetry! — Daniel Case (talk) 06:44, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
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.
Mobberjoe (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
"Because we block people for a lot of other things besides vandalism. Like ... sockpuppetry! Rightfully so! But I have already explained my reason,hopefully you would read my entire reason:"The connection is made because of my suggestion of an image change at the Thor page and knowing who @fowler&fowler is;which is purely coincidental and could happen to anyone,fowler&fowler is a very well known Wikipedia editor so a lot of people would definitely know him(including me),it's not a very unique reason,I have seen fowler &fowler debating multiple editors on multiple Wikipedia articles such as the [India] article,the [Maurya empire]] article etc." There is no proof of me being a sockpuppet other than a coincidence. There are thousands of people who know about fowler and edit superhero articles,it's not an uncommon thing. So please can I get unbanned and I would like to request the editor to read my entire comment.Thank you! — " Mobberjoe (talk) 06:54, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
Decline reason:
My use of the checkuser tool indicates that you have abused multiple accounts. PhilKnight (talk) 10:26, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
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.
Confirmed sockpuppetry. This is no coincidence. --Yamla (talk) 10:14, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
How is it confirmed? Mobberjoe (talk) 08:15, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
- Because the technical evidence is clear without a reasonable doubt. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 10:48, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
There is no confirmed reason for that. It's just an assumptions l. As wikipedia itself stats that the checkuser tool isn't magical. It doesn't find out accurately, mostly editors judge the accounts based on evidence. Which is clearly lacking. Suspicion=\=full proof evidence Mobberjoe (talk) 13:45, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
- Okay. I don't think you fully understand what checkuser can show, but if you won't accept it then so be it. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 17:08, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
What did it show? Mobberjoe (talk) 01:54, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
- That you are using the same person as Odinson878 Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 17:25, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
I'm not. The checkuser tool definitely didn't show that Mobberjoe (talk) 03:30, 14 May 2022 (UTC)