User talk:Blaxstocatamazon

Userboxes

en

This user is a native speaker of the English language.

This user is a lawyer.

September 2024

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for making legal threats or taking legal action.

You are not allowed to edit Wikipedia while the threats stand or the legal action is unresolved.

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 ~~~~}}. PhilKnight (talk) 03:47, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PhilKnight: Hello. I have not made any legal threat against the Wikipedia encyclopedia or any of its employees. As a participant in the discussion on this website I came to know that several Indian news websites have published the name of the Rape and Murder victim in breach of Indian Law and directions of Supreme Court of India. As a resident of India I, and very other Indian person on that discussion page, am legally obliged to report the same to the authorities/Indian Police/Magistrate under pain of prosecution if I fail to do so. The relevant section of law is section 39 of CRPC. Is it a crime to comply with the laws of India on your website which do not endanger this encyclopedia in any way ? Blaxstocatamazon (talk) 06:27, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could I ask you not to post any further that you are reporting news websites to the authorities? PhilKnight (talk) 06:31, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PhilKnight:Yes. That is not a problem and I wont post that in future. As Wikipedia is an education website I sought to educate. It seems I was wrong. Blaxstocatamazon (talk) 04:57, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If it's the same IP user who got blocked posting links to that ANI lawsuit, then they also reported a Wikipedian to authorities (per an email to which they posted a link on several talk pages), and they also posted several legal threats on the talk pages of several users from India. Nakonana (talk) 14:10, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Here are potentially relevant links, if unblocking is considered: [1][2][3] (the latter, starting at "Some IPs are directly threatening Indian editors with legal action on the talk pages of ANI and the recent Kolkata rape case."). If it's indeed the same person, then the above would be their third block (within a time span of roughly two weeks) for making legal threats (and possibly other oversighted stuff). Nakonana (talk) 14:36, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have nothing to do with that IP. I am 1600km (1000 US miles) away from that IP in India. Publishing name of an Indian rape/murder victim is a very emotive issue in India especially for human rights defenders who have struggled to get such safeguards installed in the first place. Blaxstocatamazon (talk) 04:57, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

UNBLOCK

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).

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

Request reason:

@PhilKnight: I have not made any legal threat whatsoever against the Wikipedia encyclopedia or any of its employees. As a participant in the discussion on this website I came to know that several Indian news websites have published the name of the Rape and Murder victim in breach of Indian Law and directions of Supreme Court of India. As a resident of India I, and every other Indian person on that discussion page, am legally obliged to report the same to the authorities/Indian Police/Magistrate under pain of prosecution if I fail to do so. The relevant section of law is section 39 of CRPC. I also say I will not post any further my reporting news websites to the authorities. Also, I have nothing to do with that IP who is 1600 km (1000 US miles) away. Blaxstocatamazon (talk) 05:06, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Your legal actions indirectly involve Wikipedia editors, the ones who read the media outlets you reported and edited Wikipedia as a result. I'm fairly sure that you will need to remain blocked until the legal cases you opened are concluded. We certainly cannot stop you from reporting violations of the law, but this is what must happen when you do so, especially if you post on Wikipedia that you have. 331dot (talk) 08:24, 18 September 2024 (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.

@331dot:Both the legal actions I initiated have concluded and the Supreme Court of India, on my complaint to the National Task Force for Doctor Safety, yesterday has directed Wikipedia to remove the victim's name and photographs across all Wikipedia language variants. English Wikipedians have complied based on press reports of the court directions. Blaxstocatamazon (talk) 10:29, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If your actions against the specific outlets you reported are now concluded with the action of the Supreme Court, you may make a new request for someone else to review. 331dot (talk) 11:39, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think they should be unblocked, given how they reported a wikipedian(with their real life name) to the authorities. I'm also pretty sure they were behind this now blocked(for threatening violence) IP range threatening to pursue legal action against Indian wikipedians on the talkpage of the article. [4], They also haven't addressed how they will be improving Wikipedia that would warrant an unblock. Ratnahastin (talk) 17:13, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They are a pro-Modi troll and should remain blocked. The threats and bullying have BJP's prints all over it. SerialNumber54129 13:57, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request to 3rd Admin

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

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

Request reason:

Per advise of user:33dot, I am requesting someone else to review my unblock request. As mentioned previously by myself, the Supreme Court of India (based on complaints of myself and other concerned Indian citizens of non-compliance to nation law) has directed Wikipedia to remove the name of the rape/murder victim, which can be viewed here. A recently concluded RfC has agreed with my initial postings and edited out the name of the victim. Accordingly, as my legal actions have concluded and the Wikipedia community has ultimately agreed to my expressed opinion that name of rape/murder victim should be edited out, I am requesting to be unblocked. At no stage have I threatened this encyclopedia or any employee of WMF, and I was always acting in the letter and spirit of the Terms of WMF which are the pillars of Wikipedia, and under the laws of India which I am required to obey, especially since I am an officer of the court. Blaxstocatamazon (talk) 19:26, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

Unblocking now that the legal threat is no longer outstanding. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 16:10, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blaxstocatamazon (talk) 19:26, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:NLT: Users who post legal threats are typically blocked while the threats are outstanding. I am inclined to unblock given that the legal threat is not outstanding; I do not see that this block is currently necessary to prevent disruption (even though it was certainly a good block at the time). PhilKnight, thoughts? House Blaster (talk • he/they) 20:43, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@HouseBlaster: - I agree they can be unblocked. PhilKnight (talk) 12:00, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@HouseBlaster: - immediately after being unblocked this user has jumped into a thread which concerns hindu raksha dal [5] and India against corruption LTA sockfarm, as I said last time they should not have been unblocked.- Ratnahastin (talk) 14:55, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That didn't last long. Reblocked. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 16:57, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Honestly I'm surprised that nobody realised the obvious fact how they have the same writing style like the blocked IPs of hindu raksha dal (which are only here to threaten legal action like the LTA page I listed above). - Ratnahastin (talk) 17:10, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

November 2024

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

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 ~~~~}}. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 16:57, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]