|Welcome to my talk page.
⇒ Start a new Talk topic.
Need advice please and help
Hi DorD, I left you a message earlier today but later I noticed my I.P. has been renewed. So I will post on your page and mine just to be sure you get this,
How does one proceed with a prolific Conflict of Interest/ Vandalism case without revealing the identity of the perpetrators? Assume the COI has been sustained over the course of years, and proof of affiliation with biased, misleading, or self published sources is at hand.
Also what is "Possible self promotion in userspace?" and why are some revisions deleted? I'm not promoting anything, can you explain the edits? I couldn't have posted anything anyway as I was blocked for a couple of days.... Or does that mean someone is looking into my COI complaint? I have no idea how this works... :)
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=794820807&oldid=794685636&title=User_talk:184.108.40.206 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 08:36, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
- Just noticed this at ANI Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Rapid-fire_vandalism_apparently_on_proxie. DuncanHill (talk) 09:49, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
Hi DoRD. If you recall, you blocked this user back in March for sockpuppeting, and I contacted you about this at the time. Without going through all the history of who did what and when, in your opinion, would they be eligible to be unblocked per WP:OFFER, as it's almost six months since the block? If so, is that something they would need to request on their talkpage? Thanks for your help with this. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 09:03, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
- Hello, Lugnuts. IgnorantArmies will be eligible for a Standard offer appeal on Septembrer 7. The appeal will need to be made by them on their talk page or to ArbCom (arbcom-llists.wikimedia.org). I don't know whether they're eligible for unblocking yet because I or (preferably) another CheckUser will need to run checks to verify that there haven't been any further violations.
- If you're in contact with IgnorantArmies, please encourage them to make an appeal when eligible because I, too, would like to see them return to contributing to the project. —DoRD (talk) 12:57, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
I just need to say that a user named Ram The Editor was blocked by you by the checkuserblock-account template but you misunderstood it. That user was actually for good contributions so that user should be unblocked. Please unblock Ram The Editor. Thank you. 18.104.22.168 (talk) 12:46, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- That one, out of six accounts on the same IP address, was for good contributions? No, with the dozens of vandal accounts you've created, I don't think so. —DoRD (talk) 19:42, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
No, even though others were for vandal accounts, Ram The Editor was for good contributions; Some good users get caught in same ip address and Ram The Editor was one of it, please trust Ram The Editor that he will do nothing wrong and he is for good contributions, Therefore please unblock Ram The Editor. Thank you. 22.214.171.124 (talk) 13:04, 23 September 2017 (UTC)