User talk:Mubaoinam

August 2023

Hello, I'm Moriwen. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Meitei people, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Moriwen (talk) 17:30, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Sanamahism. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. AgisdeSparte (talk) 01:10, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Sanamahism, you may be blocked from editing. AgisdeSparte (talk) 01:13, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Sanamahism. AgisdeSparte (talk) 01:14, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As you see below, there has been a technical error resulting in edits on the page Sanamahism (edits appearing as "sorry 1"). I would really appreciate if you look into this matter. Thanks! Mubaoinam (talk) 02:31, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Sanamahism, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 01:22, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why am I being blocked? Mubaoinam (talk) 01:34, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Because all you do is vandalism. Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 01:34, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

NO, I did not! This is some kind of an error here. Mubaoinam (talk) 01:35, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can you unblock me? I don't know what vandalism you are referring to? Mubaoinam (talk) 01:36, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All of the edits you did on Sanamahism were vandalism, that is why you have been banned! Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 01:37, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The edits "sorry 1" is due to my keyboard issue. This was not intentional. Mubaoinam (talk) 01:39, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn't make any sense. And if your keyboard really adds random stuff for no reason, then you shouldn't press the edit-button and save-button to begin with, both of which has to be done manually! Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 01:43, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I was editing the page Sanamahism earlier today (constructive additions). And I don't know what happened, "sorry 1" appeared as edits by me! Mubaoinam (talk) 01:46, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your earlier edits were all unsourced, making them unconstructive as well. And wether the vandalism was intentional or accidental really mean nothing as it doesn't change the fact that the vandalism was done to begin with. It is not possible for us to know 100% wether what you say about the vandalism is true or not, thus we can only judge you by what actions have been taken with your account, which in this case is damning. Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 01:57, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

When I say it was not intentional - I meant that I did not do knowingly vandalized the Wikipedia page Sanamahism. This is a genuine fault stemming from my keyboard, which I don't understand how it happened. After stating the facts, I really don't understand how this is still an issue. I have been contributing to Wikipedia since 2011 and never faced an issue. I would very much appreciate if you undo what you did and allow me to finish editing the Sanamahism page. Mubaoinam (talk) 02:03, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Do not contact me through e-mail or any other off-site means as you just did. To answer what you wrote to me in that e-mail, no I will not unban you as I have neither the will nor the ability to do so. And to answer what you wrote above, we cannot simply take your word for it, as it is not uncommon for recently banned users on any site to claim that what was done was the result of a technical difficulty, or the actions of a sibling or friend. And since we can not exactly send a team to interrogate you in person and check your technical equipment, we have no way of proving that what you are saying is correct, thus we simply have to look at the fact that your account was used to vandalise a page, and act accordingly. Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 02:15, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To state that my account is "vandalism-only account" is simply not right. Again, I state here that my action (referring to edits on the page Sanamahism with the word "sorry 1") is simply a technical fault. Neither my past edits (since 2011) nor any other current edits show that my account is a vandalism-only account. I ask that you change this immediately. Mubaoinam (talk) 02:28, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Hello Mubaoinam! Though I don't want to join your talk with others, I thought I should say something. May or may not be your edits are done intentionally, but whatever appeared in your recent edit history of Sanamahism are explicitly vandalism according to wikipedia rules. So, you have to acknowledge it as your own fault, as wikipedia rules forbade any forms of "excuses". As a third party in your discussion, I want to suggest you to thoroughly read and understand WP:NUTART, WP:VAND, WP:VERIFY, WP:RELY, WP:UNBLOCK, first of all, before doing any further actions in wikipedia. Failing to understand any of these rules and continuing to do any further actions may lead you in more troubles. Thanks! :-) Haoreima (talk) 02:39, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

August 2023

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for vandalism.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 01:32, 5 August 2023 (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).

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

Request reason:

Due to technical fault (stemming from my keyboard which I don't understand how it happened), there has been edits on the page Sanamahism. I am specifically referring to the edits appearing as "sorry 1". This is a genuine technical error and so I request my account be unblocked. I will note that I have been a contributor of Wikipedia since 2011 and my intentions are not to vandalize Wikipedia page. On the contrary, I have been providing constructive contribution on many wikipedia page. Mubaoinam (talk) 01:37, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

One edit is an accident. Dozens of edits over the course of hours is not an accident. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:33, 5 August 2023 (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.

How do you accidentally make dozens of edits? For each edit you need to type in your changes, and then press the "publish changes" button twice. I don't see how a keyboard malfunction could do that. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 02:59, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The very fact that there were dozens of edits shows that there was indeed a technical fault. I don't really understand how it happened so I cannot give you an explanation at this point. If I have to guess, this could be a result of pressing the tab key in my keyword (by someone/as a result of malfunction) and at the sometime the return key. This is seriously just a technical error. — Mubaoinam.

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).

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

Request reason:

My previous unblock request has been denied. I'd like to still request that my account be unblocked for the following reasons: # I have repeatedly stated that the my edits ("sorry 1" appearing multiple times) were a result of technical fault and this has never happened with my account before. I don't see a reason why my account is still blocked. Given that I have using Wikipedia responsibly since 2011, the likelyhood of such accident happening again is zero and so my account does not pose a threat to Wikipedia. # The block does not follow the following Wikipedia's blocking policy which I restate here: Blocks should be used to: # prevent imminent or continuing damage and disruption to Wikipedia; # deter the continuation of present, disruptive behavior; and # encourage a more productive, congenial editing style within community norms. Blocks should not be used: # to retaliate; # to disparage; # to punish; or # if there is no current conduct issue of concern. Mubaoinam (talk) 10:40, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You have not satisfactorily addressed your edits. Claiming 'technical fault' stemming from your keyboard is insufficient. Frankly, I find it impossible to believe such a thing could happen by accident, speaking as someone who has had a career as a software developer, who has soldered keyboards, and who has written bot code. Yamla (talk) 10:50, 5 August 2023 (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).

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

Request reason:

I have addressed my edits coming from technical fault. I really don't know how it happened. For folks like me, who is programming challenged, it is hard to find out how it happened. Nonetheless, I admit that those edits fall into the category of vandalizing in Wikipedia's policy. The extend of vandalism, however, does not show intention to disrupt wikipedia page, nor that such vandalism will occur again in future. This is my third appeal and I don't understand how it is Wikipedia's policy to keep blocking my account. I don't have anything further to say, rather than blocking someone who has been responsibly contributing to Wikipedia for 13 years is not justified at all. I would like my request to be reviewed seriously and not just decline again without giving proper justification as to what is achieved by further blocking my account. Mubaoinam (talk) 11:24, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You need to remain blocked to prevent the disruption caused by your editing, as you are unable to explain how it happened. This means that you cannot guarantee that it won't happen again. Until you can give a better explanation than "technical fault", there is no pathway forward here. Based on what I know about computers, I also find it virtually impossible for such a thing to occur. Editing takes at least two manual clicks. Perhaps you could find a computer programmer or expert to help you on your end, there's nothing we can do for you. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 14:40, 5 August 2023 (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.

Your technical fault makes no sense. Without a sufficient, plausible explanation, I see no path forward here. Until you find out what happened and are able to explain it to us, I don't believe any admin will lift your block. As you indicate you don't understand what happened, there's no reason to believe it won't happen again. --Yamla (talk) 12:05, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that you are worried if those edits would happen again. However, as I mentioned before, it is not clear to what extend those edits are considered vandalism. The technical fault I pointed DID NOT alter/delete/remove any page. The disruptive nature of those edits was merely adding "sorry 1" to Sanamahism which has now been removed and I have repeated appealed that it was a genuine technical fault. While I understand that you want to prevent future vandalism of such kind, I simply cannot understand that you choose to block me even after appealing many times of the technical fault. I will note here that you have effectively prevented a Wikipedia contributor from further contributions. This is based on your judgement that such technical fault is impossible to happen. From your perspective, anyone who incur such incidents and not software/programming friendly should not edit Wikipedia merely because such incidents can happen in future. I request you to look into this with a little seriousness. Thanks! Mubaoinam (talk) 12:42, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are free to disagree. I've told you what I think will be required for you to be unblocked. --Yamla (talk) 12:54, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The only explanation I can provide (rather speculate) is if both my keyboard and mouse malfunctioned somehow. Looking into where exactly "sorry 1" was inserted to Sanamahism, this could be due to the fact that return key as well as some shortcut keys from my keyboard was repeatedly entered. Look, I am really not a software/hardware friendly person. I will replace both those input devices ASAP (I don't want this to happen to my work-related stuffs). But I cannot provide any further explanation than this. Mubaoinam (talk) 13:03, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Mubaoinam @Yamla It's false. Due to a keyboard error, constant vandalism isn't produced over a 2-hour period. Furthermore, you committed similar but distinct acts of vandalism (as shown here 1,2, 3, 4), which demonstrates that you deliberately made choices to place them at different parts of the page, thinking it would go unnoticed. AgisdeSparte (talk) 13:10, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@AgisdeSparte I'd disagree to your accusation of me deliberately placing "Sorry 1" at different parts of the page. It also sounds to me like you are accusing me of doing this for some purpose. I simply don't understand what possibly I can achieve by doing this. After looking at 1,2, 3, 4, indeed I'm now convinced that return key + shortcut keys from my keyboard was entered several times for a prolonged period of time, as you say 2 hours. I am lead to think that this was not done manually by myself, as I don't think I would do this unless I have lost my mind. If you are a computer expert, please suggest how I can check what really happened. Both @AgisdeSparte and @Yamla are not providing constructive feedback to reverse this course. I'd appreciate if you provide constructive course of action to undo this. Thanks~ Mubaoinam (talk) 13:23, 5 August 2023 (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).

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

Request reason:

I provide explanation for the edits that happened to Sanamahism yesterday (thanks to my dear friend who is more tech-savy than I am!). It appears that mouse can automatically click and scroll on its own as explained here 1, 2, 3, and 4. As my friend explained to me, my mouse is faulty and what happened was that it automatically scrolled down and up all the while clicking on its own. The edits "Sorry 1" is actually a part of something I wrote elsewhere in Document. It was opened at that time when the edits happened. I was editing Sanamahism (constructive addition to the page) earlier yesterday and was opened on my browser. My friend explained to me that this can happen when the mouse driver is corrupted. I will change this mouse ASAP. So, this is now solved. Mubaoinam (talk) 15:07, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Checkuser confirmed abuse of multiple accounts. Talk page access revoked. Courcelles (talk) 22:32, 5 August 2023 (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.