User talk:1812boi

Welcome

Hello, 1812boi, 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 facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! KylieTastic (talk) 21:16, 10 December 2019 (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 new user help forum, 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

This is 1812boi's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Philippe I de Hornes (December 10)

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 is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Unsourced, and a single sentence is not enough even for a stub article as it adds nothing to the mention on House of Hornes

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:Philippe I de Hornes 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:Philippe I de Hornes, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" 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, 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) 21:16, 10 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, 1812boi! 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) 21:16, 10 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Philippe I de Hornes concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Philippe I de Hornes, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:31, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Philippe I de Hornes

Hello, 1812boi. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Philippe I de Hornes".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! JMHamo (talk) 16:16, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock Request

This is simply not true. I have 1 account. I have used it, as you can see from my editing history, sporadically in the last few years. There is simply no evidence that I have abused this account or have other accounts that I abuse. PhilKnight (talk) 06:20, 22 January 2022 (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).

1812boi (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I was banned for being a sockpuppet of user Account10000, despite no mention of my name in the investigation, or any evidence to prove that I was involved with this account; my ban reason was listed as "Account10000" with no explanation. If you browse my edit history you will see a small variety of contributions and no abusive behavior. 1812boi (talk) 12:54, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

My use of the checkuser tool indicates that you have abused multiple accounts. PhilKnight (talk) 13:42, 21 January 2022 (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.

Unblock Request

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).

1812boi (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am entirely unsure why my account has come up under the category for sockpuppets of Account10000. I have scanned the investigation report [1]; there is no mention of my account or any listed evidence against it. I have 1 account. I have used it, as you can see from my editing history, sporadically in the last few years. There is simply no evidence that I have abused this account or have other accounts that I abuse. I am fully willing to comply with any information request for my unblock. 1812boi (talk) 00:31, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Checkuser verified abuser of multiple accounts. Unambiguous. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 01:42, 27 January 2022 (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.

Unblock Review, Part 3

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

1812boi (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

jpgordon reviewed my case and said it was unambiguous without any evidence. His top profile message says plainly - Checkuser is not magic pixie dust. There is no evidence that I am the sockpuppet of any account. I will provide my IP, email of this account, user history, and any - ANY - other method of verification possible upon request. I am not a sockpuppet, and I am being put under by a faulty system. 1812boi (talk) 02:09, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

So, here's the thing. The checkuser evidence is unambiguous. Entirely. But, your requests sound different to those we see, over and over and over again, from Account10000. On that basis, I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps this is one of those rare cases where a completely innocent person gets caught up with a prolific troll. I want to be clear, I'm lifting the block because I do think I was mistaken here and, for that mistake, you have my unreserved apology. Thanks for sticking with us and particularly, thanks for remaining calm in the face of adversity. Yamla (talk) 09:43, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]