User talk:For a Good Time

January 2020

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

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 why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

ST47 (talk) 17:45, 29 January 2020 (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).

For a Good Time (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

No abuse taking place. Access from AirBNB home. For a Good Time (talk) 04:12, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Speechless. Sometimes I'm just too gullible. You would do well to consider that any further disruption will result in removal of your talk page access. Your best bet is to contact the WP:ArbCom. Please see the following boilerplate. I'm sorry, but I cannot unblock you at this time as this is a sockpuppetry and/or checkuser block. Check users have access to technical and personally identifying information they may not disclose openly on Wikipedia. Please read and heed the relevant sections of the WP:GAB. If this is not your original account, you will need to appeal at your original account. -- Deep fried okra 16:56, 30 January 2020 (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.

@ST47:, well that's a new one. I cannot unblock a checkuser block. I'll ask blocking admin to opine, though I suspect there are other factors.-- Deep fried okra 04:53, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Deepfriedokra: This account is a confirmed sockpuppet of globally locked account User:332dash, created from the same residential connection just over one day after that account was locked. The duration of time that 332dash has been on that IP range is not consistent with an AirBnB guest. ST47 (talk) 16:24, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@ST47:@Deepfriedokra: That is correct, assuming that 332dash is the property owner, and I am the guest (in a separate bungalow). My departure from here is in 10 weeks, so I can just make a new account when I get home to Denmark, but it would have been nice to be able to edit Wikipedia while I am on my extended stay in Florida. There is so much cultural and biological history here that is not properly represented on Wikipedia. I spoke with the property owner about this, and he laughed. He confirmed that he was "banned" (?) from Wikipedia because he dared to give his account a name that you administrators did not approve in advance. It is your decision, but I believe it will be to the detriment of Wikipedia to prevent me from improving content for the next two and one half months. - For a Good Time (talk) 17:20, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@ST47:@Deepfriedokra: Further, I have surveyed with my own eyes the contributions of 332dash, who is the very pleasant and hospitable property owner where I am staying, and frankly I do not see any of the "disruption" that you are advocating exists. - For a Good Time (talk) 17:28, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welllll. all-righty-then. Sorry, it is not my decision. -- Deep fried okra 17:34, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]