User talk:FloralRiver

Block

Hi, @Oshwah:, can you please help me? I was originally Sapah3 (talk · contribs) and I have had a clean start. I am not editing the pages that I previously edited on my old account. I am only here to contribute to Wikipedia but as SilkTork (talk · contribs) told me, somebody has cleverly set me up to make it look like I'm disrupting Wikipedia. I edited Wikipedia pages and provided messages ([here and here on ShelteredCook (talk · contribs)'s talk page to ask them why they have reverted my edits and made other edits to these pages that go against what the sources say. Isn't the rule on Wikipedia to follow what the sources say? So why has ShelteredCook (talk · contribs) reverted or made changes to every single one of my edits? I am merely trying to contribute to Wikipedia. How am I supposed to have a clean start if I keep getting tracked like this? I've even tried to change up the way I provide edit summaries. I created my original Wikipedia account after a registered user told me to create an account to be taken seriously. If I knew that this is what would happen, I would never have created an account. Can you please tell me how I am going to proceed from here? (FloralRiver (talk) 07:50, 23 November 2020 (UTC))

If you're wondering why this account was created, it was created in the aftermath after a blocked user MistyfelSR (talk · contribs) reported me because they had a vendetta against me. At the time, I had suspicion that this user would come after me in another form and somehow get me blocked. I created this account (FloralRiver}) to defend myself in case that ever happened. Obviously, after I was blocked on Sapah3 (talk · contribs) I realised that I don't need another account to defend myself because I can still edit my talk page. I knew I had this account but I had misplaced the password for it and it was only after SilkTork spoke about the concept of a Wikipedia:Clean start, a few days ago, that I started searching for the password for it and I found it. I still wasn't decided on how I wanted to proceed with Sapah3 (talk · contribs) so I decided to test out a clean start by using this account and see what it felt like. I know I should have waited but I wanted to start editing Wikipedia again. Clearly, it was incorrect of me to test out a clean start while my original account was blocked. I should have just waited until the block ended before I started using this account. (FloralRiver (talk) 08:11, 23 November 2020 (UTC))

Um, no idea why you would ping me but I'm pretty sure SilkTork was being really clear with you that 1. You're not allowed to have a "clean start" while you're blocked and 2. NOT edit in the same areas and editing in the same way. This is explicitly stated at WP:CLEANSTART: (A clean start is not permitted if there are active bans, blocks or sanctions (including, but not limited to those listed here) in place against the old account.) at well. You acknowledged his response on your master's talk page so I'm struggling to understand why you're feigning ignorance now. ShelteredCook (talk) 08:07, 23 November 2020 (UTC) Blocked sock. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 19:58, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

I didn't know I pinged you. I thought using user|user's name didn't lead to a ping. Well, it was not my intention to ping you. (FloralRiver (talk) 08:13, 23 November 2020 (UTC))

I was typing out another response before you edited my talk page @ShelteredCook: which led to an edit conflict. I'm not feigning ignorance. I have explained it in my second message. (FloralRiver (talk) 08:15, 23 November 2020 (UTC))

I just have no idea why you didn't look at my edits carefully without reverting them @ShelteredCook:. Everything was properly cited, I explained my edits in the summary. Yet for some reason you came and decided that my edits were irresponsible when there was nothing wrong with them. Those three pages were traditionally outside of the areas that I usually edit. They were supposed to be low key edits that followed what the sources say. They were not big junks of text. I was waiting until my block ended to add the huge pieces of text I want to add to the British Malaya page. Those three edits were supposed to be a test to see how I felt editing Wikipedia under a different name. I wasn't going to come back and edit again until my block had ended. When you reverted my edits without providing proper reasons, I didn't want to wait and I thought I would reply to you and try to change the way I spoke to detach myself from my original account and see how successful I was with that. Clearly that hasn't worked. (FloralRiver (talk) 08:29, 23 November 2020 (UTC))

You know, all of this went downhill considerably. Somehow a blocked user, with a vendetta, mangaged to evade their block and create another account and block me by associating my original account with IP addresses from the US and Australia (despite the fact that the edits on those IP addresses aren't even the same as the edits on my original account). I only ever contribute positively to Wikipedia yet here I am paying the price because an IP user developed a grudge against me. Unfortunate to think that the writing was on the wall, I just didn't see it. (FloralRiver (talk) 08:35, 23 November 2020 (UTC))

@ShelteredCook: as per the guidelines, it's not necessary to revert every single one of my edits. I am aware that you have classified me as a sock but this edit, for example, isn't problematic because "India" is mentioned in the source (and was originally there before an IP user deleted the information, I merely reinstated it). This edit is also not problematic because "East Asian" is the correct term to use, not "Asian". This edit is also not necessary because my edits were in line with the source that I added and properly cited (I just couldn't find the DOI for it), your edits actually go against what the source says. This edit is not necessary either. Again, I edited that page as per the sources on that page. I explained this in my message to you on your talk page and provided you the sources for you to have a look at. I don't mind if you have a negative attitude towards me, feel free to look down on me negatively if that's how you feel about me, but please don't revert my edits just because you don't like me. I edit Wikipedia with sources and I am very careful with the way I publish information on Wikipedia. It wasn't necessary to revert all of my edits. (FloralRiver (talk) 08:59, 23 November 2020 (UTC))

@ShelteredCook: can you please tell me how I'm making contentious edits on articles such as East Asian people, when I'm merely following what the sources say? I edited that page according to the sources listed in the article lead. Since when is following what the sources say "contentious"? Did you even look at my edits before you used twinkle? (FloralRiver (talk) 13:09, 23 November 2020 (UTC))

"as SilkTork (talk · contribs) told me, somebody has cleverly set me up to make it look like I'm disrupting Wikipedia". That's not quite what I said. My wording was: "There is of course a possibility that the other user is not you, but given what we can see, it is rather more likely than less that it is you. The only reasonable explanation is that someone with good knowledge of how sockpuppet investigations work has deliberately set you up in a clever and subtle manner." To put that into plain language: "The evidence is that you have been sockpuppeting. So you have been blocked for it. The only possible explanation for you not sockpuppeting is an elaborate scheme by someone with a vendetta. It is not impossible that is the case, but it is unlikely. Same as a pupil saying "The hamster ate my homework" - it is not impossible, but it is unlikely. Given that you used this account while blocked, I am indefinitely blocking the Sapah3 account. It appears you are not trustworthy. And which ever account you use, your edits are problematic. SilkTork (talk) 12:20, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

@SilkTork: okay I understand, I guess I was speaking from my perspective because a blocked user (who is a sockpuppet) has come after me multiple times, first as an IP user and then as four registered users (three of which were confirmed to be sockpuppets (Cope375 (talk · contribs), Shetskein (talk · contribs) and MistyfelSR (talk · contribs)). I have been unfairly targeted after I reverted an IP user's edit and they came back to me once again and reported me for the upteenth time because they have a vendetta against me. Secondly, I don't think my edits are problematic. Can you please tell me how my edits are problematic? I edit using sources and I know I broke the rules by using this account but unfortunately I had no patience but my plan was not to continue editing on this account until my block ended. Like I said on my original account, I had new information to add but I didn't add that using this account. The reason, because I wanted to wait until my block had finished before I started making big contributions to Wikipedia agin. I made three initial edits using this account to test what it felt like to edit under a different "persona" per se. The new edits I made on this account were not problematic, they were relatively minor. I used sources and read through the sources and made those edits (such as here and here). So can please tell me how these edits are problematic? This whole thing is disapppointing because I edit responsibly, I don't vandalise or add information without sources. If there are issues then I will discuss at talk pages. So can you please tell me how my edits are problematic? (FloralRiver (talk) 12:47, 23 November 2020 (UTC))

@SilkTork: You indefinitely blocked me and claimed my edits were "problematic". Can you please tell me why my edits are problematic? I'm not giving up on this matter so I'd like to know why you think my edits are problematic before I proceed? (FloralRiver (talk) 00:32, 24 November 2020 (UTC))