User talk:E.Imanoff

Welcome!

Hi E.Imanoff! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! Woodroar (talk) 00:00, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your signature

I noticed your signature on this edit and thought I'd point you towards WP:CUSTOMSIG. Custom signatures are okay but they should include your username and not make it appear that you're someone else—like Google, for example. If you have any questions, let me know. Cheers! Woodroar (talk) 00:05, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Woodroar Okey. --E.Im anoff ^Snatch 01:06, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

January 2022

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. 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 ~~~~}}. --Blablubbs (talk) 11:44, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unblok

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).

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

Request reason:

Since this account is currently blocked, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Elshad_Iman_(El%C5%9Fad_%C4%B0man)#Meta can you just swap the users and let the editor use the other account? I have read the rules in full and I promise not to break them. I think if I had the opportunity to stay in Enviki I, in turn, would strictly follow the rules. Please activate my E.Imanoff account.

Decline reason:

We can't "swap users"; you must request unblock from your original account. If this is it, okay. I am an administrator and I haven't read the rules in full- there are more than you probably think. It isn't necessary that you know every single rule, but you do need to be aware of the ones most relevant to you, such as the rules that are the reason for this block. We will need more than your mere promise- you must demonstrate your understanding by telling us what you did wrong, how you will not do it again, and what productive edits you wish to make. 331dot (talk) 16:18, 22 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.

Unblok 2

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).

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

Request reason:

Dear 331dot, what I did wrong: I have appealed to Metawiki to remove my block- https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Steward_requests/Global/2021-w52#Request_for_Global_unblock - As a result of the discussion, I was advised to write to Ombuds commission. The Ombuds Commission has looked into my complaint and arrived at the conclusion that it is outside the Commission's scope. I was advised to complaint within the local community of enwiki. I will not do it again: (sockpuppet) From now on, my activity will be to participate in discussions of articles that are candidates for deletion, to express opinions, and to create and edit articles by encyclopedic people. Since other accounts are currently blocked, let the editor use the E.Imanoff account. https://az.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vikipediya:%C4%B0dar%C9%99%C3%A7i_m%C3%BCzakir%C9%99si#Elshad_Iman_(El%C5%9Fad_%C4%B0man)-%C4%B1n_yanl%C4%B1%C5%9F_olaraq_bloklanmas%C4%B1 Because I do my editing with E.Imanoff in my Azerbaijani and Russian profiles and I do not need an alternative user profile.--E.Im anoff ^Snatch 19:33, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only. This unblock request has been open for more than two weeks but has not proven sufficient for any reviewing administrator to take action. You are welcome to request a new block review if you substantially reword your request. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 11:06, 4 March 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.

Please read the message I have left on the talk page of another account of yours, and do what I asked. Also, please have an open unblock request on only one account: remove any other unblock requests. JBW (talk) 23:00, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JBW, I have a 3 blocked account. I can't use these two accounts anymore because they are blocked,(Elshadiman and Elshad Iman (Elşad İman)) but I recently opened the only account that I worked on, but unfortunately the account was blocked. E.Imanoff Please open this new account. Because I do my editing with E.Imanoff in my Azerbaijani and Russian profiles and I do not need an alternative user profile. Thanks. Best regards--E.Im anoff ^Snatch 11:42, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure that's all your accounts? If so, can you tell us what your connection is to Personbaku? Also if you can thonk of any other accounts of anyone else who has edited collaboratively with you, it will help to clarify things if you can mention them. I am very willing to consider unblocking your account, but as long as there are doubts about your connection to other accounts, it will be difficult for me to justify unblocking, so it really is in your interest to clarify the situation. JBW (talk) 13:53, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JBW, Yes, it is a very good idea to clarify this. I want to say that I use Wikipedia a lot when I'm at work, and I'd like to draw your attention to one issue - (I know for sure that someone from our office was Personbaku, but I couldn't identify who) Dear colleague, the Internet protocol allocated by the provider for the apartment or office itself - whether static or dynamic - it does not matter, only the main IP address of the provider, which was in the server itself, does not change! for example, if you connect to the internet via VPN and edit a wiki article, well then Wikipedia will block the main IP address, even if you are a dynamic internet protocol user, you won't be able to login again and edit the articles. A static IP address specified in TCP/IP or a dynamic IP address automatically configured by DHCP itself does not make it into Wikipedia's memory and history. Instead, the primary IP address assigned by your ISP to your apartment or regular office is stored in history or memory. For example, even if two employees in the same office edit Wikipedia from different computers on different days, their IP addresses will be the same even if the "Internet Protocol Version 4 (TCP/IPv4)" on their computers is different. --E.Im anoff ^Snatch 18:58, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Did you see that? I was blocked in RuWiki after my appeal here, but they did not investigate the issue. Solve this please.

Mr Q-bit array and Mr GAndy I clearly see that I am unjustifiably blocked in RuWiki, please open my block. Best regards: Elshad Iman --E.Im anoff ^Snatch 20:48, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Do not use your talkpage access here to send notifications to people on a wiki where you do not have talkpage access. It is considered harassment, and it will cause you to lose the ability to edit this page. SQL ^{Query Me!} 20:05, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okey SQL, I understand you, thank you, delete that part if you want.--E.Im anoff ^Snatch 20:16, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear colleague JBW, I would be very pleased if you could devote your valuable time to my issue. Thanks for attention. --E.Im anoff ^Snatch 23:55, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mr JBW, I think the problem stems from an IP collision. Now I don't know if Meta will confirm it, but it's true.

These users may have used vpn, so they collided with my ip address, which I think is worth investigating.--E.Im anoff ^Snatch 00:17, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock final

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).

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

Request reason:

Dear Mr. Vermont, I think something went wrong with my block. I openly demanded that the side profile be banned (later it was identified as socks?) #As I mentioned above, the locking of my account is supposed to be based on the existence of other accounts, but it is necessary to believe that there is a mistake. I am an experienced and helpful user; The admins have given me certain privileges for my contributions in the Azerbaijani language section. Please reconsider the bloc decision. First of all, according to the rules, the indefinite blocking of a user working on Wikipedia should take place only after discussions. But without discussion, I was blocked indefinitely. #I think the problem stems from an IP collision. Now I don't know if admin will confirm it, but it's true. If I have made any mistakes in my activities, I promise that I will not make any more mistakes. #Since Elshad Iman (Elşad İman) is currently blocked, please let me use the account E.Imanoff, because I do my editing in Azerbaijani languages articles with this profile and I don't need an alternative profile. I would also like to contribute to the English Wikipedia. My goal is to participate in discussions about candidate pages for deletion and to prepare articles by encyclopedic personalities. Please review user activities again and make the right decision. I think if I had the opportunity to stay in Enviki I, in turn, would strictly follow the rules. Thanks in advance! E.Im anoff ^Snatch 16:19, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Given that you were actively socking during the pendency of this request, the block clearly still necessary. Sir Sputnik (talk) 22:03, 9 March 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

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).

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

Request reason:

I am applying in the correct form, and when my request is denied with such an answer, — Decline reason: Given that you were actively socking during the pendency of this request, the block clearly still necessary. I cannot find another to write to. I turn to you again. Dear Mr. Blablubbs, Mr. SummerKrut, Mr. Vermont, Mr. JBW and Mr. Yamla, I think something went wrong with my block. I openly demanded that the side profile be banned (later it was identified as socks?) #As I mentioned above, the locking of my account is supposed to be based on the existence of other accounts, but it is necessary to believe that there is a mistake. I am an experienced and helpful user; The admins have given me certain privileges for my contributions in the Azerbaijani language section. Please reconsider the bloc decision. First of all, according to the rules, the indefinite blocking of a user working on Wikipedia should take place only after discussions. But without discussion, I was blocked indefinitely. #I think the problem stems from an IP collision. Now I don't know if admin will confirm it, but it's true. If I have made any mistakes in my activities, I promise that I will not make any more mistakes. #Since Elshad Iman (Elşad İman) is currently blocked, please let me use the account E.Imanoff, because I do my editing in Azerbaijani languages articles with this profile and I don't need an alternative profile. I would also like to contribute to the English Wikipedia. My goal is to participate in discussions about candidate pages for deletion and to prepare articles by encyclopedic personalities. Please review user activities again and make the right decision. I think if I had the opportunity to stay in Enviki I, in turn, would strictly follow the rules. Thanks in advance! E.Im anoff ^Snatch 22:51, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only. This unblock request has been open for more than two weeks but has not proven sufficient for any reviewing administrator to take action. You are welcome to request a new block review if you substantially reword your request. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 11:04, 3 April 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.

At Ruviki, I applied to the admin page for an encyclopedic article by a non-profit organization at this link. Then I was blocked because I was the puppet account of a globally blocked user. I recently received a warning about unblocking my account - after reading the application here, I realized that Ruviki had blocked me because I was still blocked on Enviki, and this discussion said that a user's account could be opened on Ruviki if Enviki considered the user's block unjustified. I am one of the most active users in Ruviki and you will see it clearly if you look at the history of my Elshad Iman account. Please unblock, I'm not Canvassing with my suckpuppet Elshad Iman and E.Imanoff so it wouldn't be right to keep me on the block for long. I ask you to restore my user rights to my E.Imanoff account. --E.Im anoff ^Snatch 22:31, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear colleague JBW, can you make a decision on the issue? I have explained in detail above.

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).

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

Request reason:

I understand the reasons given for the block. However, I would absolutely beg for an administrator to review my edit and contribution history again. I understand that the technical anti-sock puppetry systems in place are solid and reliable, however I can wholeheartedly put my hands up and say that I have no relation to the accused user in any shape or form. Again, can my edit history and contributions please be reviewed at least again one more time? Or alternatively, can I request to be posted to the administrator's noticeboard for my account to be thoroughly reviewed again? At Ruviki, I applied to the admin page for an encyclopedic article by a non-profit organization at this link. Then I was blocked because I was the puppet account of a globally blocked user. I recently received a warning about unblocking my account - after reading the application here, I realized that Ruviki had blocked me because I was still blocked on Enviki, and this discussion said that a user's account could be opened on Ruviki if Enviki considered the user's block unjustified. I am one of the most active users in Ruviki and you will see it clearly if you look at the history of my Elshad Iman account. Please unblock, I'm not Canvassing with my suckpuppet Elshad Iman and E.Imanoff so it wouldn't be right to keep me on the block for long. I ask you to restore my user rights to my E.Imanoff account. I think something went wrong with my block. I openly demanded that the side profile be banned (later it was identified as socks?) *As I mentioned above, the locking of my account is supposed to be based on the existence of other accounts, but it is necessary to believe that there is a mistake. I am an experienced and helpful user; The admins have given me certain privileges for my contributions in the Azerbaijani language section. Please reconsider the bloc decision. First of all, according to the rules, the indefinite blocking of a user working on Wikipedia should take place only after discussions. But without discussion, I was blocked indefinitely. *I think the problem stems from an IP collision. Now I don't know if admin will confirm it, but it's true. If I have made any mistakes in my activities, I promise that I will not make any more mistakes. *Since Elshad Iman (Elşad İman) is currently blocked, please let me use the account E.Imanoff, because I do my editing in Azerbaijani languages articles with this profile and I don't need an alternative profile. I would also like to contribute to the English Wikipedia. My goal is to participate in discussions about candidate pages for deletion and to prepare articles by encyclopedic personalities. Please review user activities again and make the right decision. I think if I had the opportunity to stay in Enviki I, in turn, would strictly follow the rules. Thanks in advance! I hope I'm able to be spared a chance in this situation. --E.Im anoff Snatch 17:56, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This request still does not address your ongoing sockpuppetry, so this request cannot succeed. Given that you've now had a dozen or so unsuccessful unblock requests across multiple accounts in the last few months, I'm revoking your access to this page. Sir Sputnik (talk) 12:28, 7 April 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.

Note to the admins: He was banned in Turkish Wikipedia because of he was not disclosuring his paid-contributions. Best,--Kadı Message 10:40, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note to the admins: This comment is unverified and an unexplored information.--E.Im anoff ^Snatch 11:16, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Turkish Wikipedia CU @Elmacenderesi blocked you. What are you trying to imply? Kadı Message 11:29, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Do you look at history, do in-depth research, see if my decision to block is justified?--E.Im anoff ^Snatch 11:33, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Elmacenderesi is an experienced CheckUser. My home wiki is trwiki and I looked at your history. Not only tr, you are advertising in azwiki also. Elmacenderesi's decision is right. Kadı Message 11:36, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have nothing to tell you, do not try to interfere with my editing of the Azeri-language wikipedia, are you calling the family template genealogy an advertisement? --E.Im anoff ^Snatch 11:48, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it is an advertisement. Are you notable? Is your wife notable? Is your child notable? You are using Wikimedia projects (Commons, Wikidata, Azwiki, Enwiki, Trwiki) for PR purposes. I am not going to reply again to your messages. An English Wikipedia administrator will evaluate your unblock request. Have a good day. Kadı Message 11:52, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
FAMILY TEMPLATE IS NOT ADVERTISING. E.Im anoff ^Snatch 12:01, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it is. Kadı Message 12:04, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]