User talk:PlayingLife6

Welcome

Hello, PlayingLife6, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to help you get started. Happy editing! KylieTastic (talk) 23:00, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
Introduction Contributing to Wikipedia The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Intuitive guide to Wikipedia
Finding your way around
Table of contents Directories and indexes Department directory
Editing articles
How to develop an article Simplified Manual of Style

Getting help
Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Our help forum for new editors, the Teahouse The Help Desk, for more advanced questions Help pages Article Wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles
How you can help
Community Portal Join a WikiProject Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community

Welcome to my talk page!

Your submission at Articles for creation: D. Paul Schafer (April 3)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by KylieTastic was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:D. Paul Schafer and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:D. Paul Schafer, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

KylieTastic (talk) 22:59, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, PlayingLife6! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! KylieTastic (talk) 22:59, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 2021

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 any gender-related dispute or controversy and associated people. 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.

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.

Funcrunch (talk) 03:51, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks, I will stay away from those topics. PlayingLife6 (talk) 12:48, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Filipz123 per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Filipz123. 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 ~~~~}}. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:39, 21 April 2021 (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).

PlayingLife6 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

An administrator has denied my last appeal for valid reasons, and (s)he gave me some suggestions for what I should add to make the decision process easier, let me first copy and paste my original appeal, because I feel it is relevant if I am given a new administrator to look over this appeal:

Wow. This was a huge surprise for me. This block came out of nowhere. PlayingLife6 is my first account on Wikipedia, and I have made nothing but constructive edits for the last month or so. Because of 1 edit I made on Nikola Tesla where I changed ¨Born and raised in the Austrian Empire¨ to ¨Born and raised in Croatia in the Austrian Empire¨ I was blocked indefinitely and I left quite a just reason for this in my edit summary, other parts of the article said similar things. Such as how it says he was born in Modern Day Croatia and stuff like that even though Croatia didn't exist at the time. I genuinely just thought I was helping, like I said all my other edits have been constructive and I have even begun working on a researched draft article that is now deleted. All of my other edits have been deleted to my knowledge. However, looking further into it, I see why I am blocked. They think I am someone else who constantly makes alternate accounts. This person is not me, I am not Filipz123. I see the similarities, I really do, he edited from Ontario and was also of Balkan Slavic heritage, and mentioned this. They mentioned we type in a similar way, but perhaps this can be explained by the fact that maybe both of us were just taught a peculiar way to type that is exclusive to Ontario, or just a coincidence. I really don't know. All I can say is I am NOT this person. His investigations go back to 2016. I would have been 12 years old at that time, I was not vandalizing Wikipedia. I can see that this Filipz person was an awful human being, and he is not me. Heck, even reviewing some of the recent dates on the investigation, I can see that he apparently had ¨long standing Anglophobia.¨ That is definitely not me! My entire Dad's family is from England and Scotland, my last name originates from Somerset. I don't know how I can prove I am not this person to you. Overall, I really just don't know what else to say, this person is not me. This is the first Wikipedia account I have made and all my edits have been mainly constructive and definitely reasonable I would say. I'm a huge fan of Wikipedia and want to help with projects on it, I have even begun making my own drafts and projects. Please, unblock me. I am quite surprised and sad that I have gotten mixed up in all of this.

The administrator told me that ¨To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that either the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or that the block is no longer necessary because you understand what you have been blocked for, will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and will make useful contributions instead.¨ Allow me to convince you now.

The block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia because I am not this person who was vandalizing, and my account has not made any sort of disruptive or damaging edits on Wikipedia. I will not continue to make damaging edits, as I don't believe I have done so in the past. (But, after this experience I will definitely be more mindful and open for discussion.) I will make useful contributions to Wikipedia, as I feel I already have. Almost all of my edits were not reverted, and were helpful to increasing information on Wikipedia, and as I have mentioned, I have begun my own draft for an entirely new article about a local Canadian author. I can ensure you, my account will only make constructive edits. I feel that what I have said here is convincing enough for me to be unblocked. Thank you.

PlayingLife6 (talk) 23:31, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Checkuser evidence is overwhelming. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇} 05:51, 22 April 2021 (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.

A note to any reviewing admin—I know this is obvious and not really needed, but just in case: First of all, the user is banned, not just blocked, and therefore admins are not free to lift the block. Secondly, of course the user is— very obviously—a sock puppet. His history, apart from the monumental damage, unquestionably proves constant pathological lying—he has been lying about everything in exactly the same manner for years, which shows in his unblock requests, too (including this one—he even used the same words and expressions in his previous messages and unblock requests years ago). So if you are not familiar with this case, please don't let this naive request deceive you—you're dealing with a person who was already described as "a habitual liar" 5 years ago.—J. M. (talk) 01:19, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am telling you that's not me! How can I prove this to you? Do you want physical ID or picture of my face? I was 11 and 12 years old in 2016! This person IS NOT ME!!!! PlayingLife6 (talk) 01:22, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also, you can keep watch on my account, I haven't and will not make any disruptive edits. I agree, the similarities between me and this person is just an ¨eerily similar roommate¨ thing I guess. Even thought there is no way for me to prove I am not this person, what matters is I have not and WILL not make any sort of disruptive edits! Why is this happening to me? I just want to be apart of the Wikipedia community. All honesty. PlayingLife6 (talk) 01:27, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry for sounding angry in my last messages. To be honest this whole ordeal is actually making me pretty mad in real life. It's all pretty surprising to me as I have not done anything wrong. Hopefully once this is all cleared up we can have some fun on this platform together. I really like the Wikipedia community and project and I want to be apart of that. PlayingLife6 (talk) 01:34, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to point out that according to Wikipedias own articles, there is approximately somewhere between 60,000 - 70,000 Croatian Canadians in Ontario. So the fact that the basis for this entire investigation is that I am one of 10s of thousands of people and supposedly this guy was too is just such a stretch to me. (see the article here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Croatian_Canadians) PlayingLife6 (talk) 02:02, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please, please read this and believe me. All my edits have been good faith and obviously not an attempt at vandalism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Don%27t_be_quick_to_assume_that_someone_is_a_sockpuppet PlayingLife6 (talk) 02:28, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]