User talk:98th Century

March 2017

Hello, I'm Jusdafax. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to 9800— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Jus da fax 22:11, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok

I can use the sandbox instead. No problem I do wonder how is the information that I added not constructive?

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 00:20, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Home Lander (talk) 00:35, 12 March 2017 (UTC) Why? Do you think I was involved in something bad? I've only been working and help improve the site.98th Century (talk) 00:38, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Brookerbs, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

Home Lander (talk) 01:48, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

March 2017

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. Acroterion (talk) 03:07, 12 March 2017 (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).

98th Century (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am wanting to help improve Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia by creating pages for the encyclopedia. 98th Century (talk) 05:20, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You're blocked for sockpuppetry, your unblock requests need to address this. Max Semenik (talk) 07:30, 13 March 2017 (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.

It says above in Acroterion's blocking box "Note that using multiple accounts IS ALLOWED, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted." So if it IS ALLOWED, why am I being blocked from the site? And Sock-puppetry is using more than 1 account to edit right?98th Century (talk) 23:46, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Because you're using them illegitimately by disrupting the encyclopedia and by creating new accounts in violation of your block. If you've been blocked you may not edit Wikipedia for any reason with any account or IP. Acroterion (talk) 03:06, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So then, why I am blocked from editing with even one account? In other words, why am I even blocked in the first place? I mean like, why am I blocked from editing with any account? How am I using them illegitimately? How was I disrupting the encyclopedia?98th Century (talk) 03:57, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Because you've made disruptive edits with every account you've used and because you've never, ever understood why your edits are problematic. Since you don't understand that, you can't edit Wikipedia. This conversation is proof that you're not getting it. Acroterion (talk) 23:50, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How were my edits disruptive?98th Century (talk) 17:53, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You've never, ever understood why your edits are problematic and I'm not explaining again because there's obviously no point. Talkpage access revoked. Acroterion (talk) 02:51, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]