User talk:Fr33d0m0fSp33c4

What can I do? I have been accused of sock puppetry and have been blocked indefinitely. It is true that I have multiple accounts but I only want to edit Wikipedia for the good. Punk4orchrist; Christian Sirolli; and fr33d0m0fSp33c4 are all three of my accounts and all blocked. I have used all of them to help Wikipedia and point out errors in articles never to vandalize. My second account I used to point out bias right before it was blocked for sock puppetry.

This user is a sockpuppet of a sockpuppet.

Fr33d0m0fSp33c4, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Fr33d0m0fSp33c4! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Osarius (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 17:21, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries

It's great that you are helping to enhance Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions.

A small point: could you please consider using more informative edit summaries? An edit summary should be a very brief description of how the particular edit is improving the article. An edit summary could read, e.g. "Linking", "Copyedit", "Add content", or "Add reference": Noyster (talk), 18:46, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks for the advice. Fr33d0m0fS33c4 18:47, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for sock puppetry. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that 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 may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:50, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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).

Fr33d0m0fSp33c4 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

May I please be unblocked? I just want to help Wikipedia. If you look at my contributions, it shows that I have been looking for faulty pages and doing some good to them. I have finally created my first account and on the second day I get blocked because me being curious about the process of blocking works is suspicious. I have some experience with Wikipedia before I got an account, editing under an IP address. Many have done so. I finally decided yesterday to see what it is like to get an account. Please unblock me. Fr33d0m0fS33c4User:Fr33d0m0fSp33c4-User talk:Fr33d0m0fSp33c4 02:14, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This does not appear to be accurate or honest. You may want to log in to your first account and try your luck there. Kuru (talk) 02:27, 15 October 2015 (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.

This is my first account.

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).

Fr33d0m0fSp33c4 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

On 10/13/15 I created this account after editing under IP addresses. I wanted to see what it is like to have an account with Wikipedia. Then the next day (10/14/15) I was curious about what Admins do when they blocked. I had questions like "If a user is going to get blocked does he/she get to say anything before they do in their defense?". I found out that a block can be used as a preventative of anything that could harm or disrupt Wikipedia. Then some Admins start wondering if I was a sock puppet or a sock puppeteer, leading to me getting blocked. Before I was blocked and asked about how blocks worked, I was clicking on the Random Article button and seeing what I could do to help any articles with errors. I helped quite a few. My favorite articles to help are those with insufficient links to other articles. These were the main articles that I looked for. Now I can't help Wikipedia any more because I am blocked. Fr33d0m0fS33c4User:Fr33d0m0fSp33c4-User talk:Fr33d0m0fSp33c4 14:14, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Checkuser verified abuser of multiple accounts. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 14:57, 15 October 2015 (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.

I have heard of checkuser, doesn't it only check if an IP address is used by multiple accounts? How could anyone possibly be sure that those multiple accounts are interrelated?

About my block

Why am I blocked? Am I being punished? Fr33d0m0fS33c4User:Fr33d0m0fSp33c4-User talk:Fr33d0m0fSp33c4 15:02, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have lied to other editors and insisted that your accounts were unrelated despite all evidence to the contrary. There were serious WP:NPOV concerns raised with both previous accounts that would also need to be addressed before an unblock could be considered. I would suggest that you review WP:STANDARD OFFER and follow the advice there if you would like to regain the trust of the community.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:26, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Ponyo: Actually, with my second account I addressed WP:NPOV in Creation Science.

May I be allowed a Second chance? I am willing to whatever is required. I will behave and edit Wikipedia positively. Just please give me a second chance. I understand that creating multiple accounts is frowned upon and that I should not have done that. Allow me to prove to you guys that I am sincere.

You've had several chances already, it seems. Of course, since you have a history of deceptive behavior, it's hard to tell when you're being sincere. I would suggest looking into Mr. Ponyo's offer above. Kuru (talk) 01:40, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]