User talk:J2009j

Blocked as a sockpuppet

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively as a sockpuppet of User:Demeter39G per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Demeter39G. 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.

Izno (talk) 04:26, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

{{unblock| Hi! How is this related? This is an older account I have had. It was never used for any votes or anything similar with another account. Please, go ahead and verify yourself. The log in is saved on different devices. I used whatever the page was open. You wrote yourself that- Note that multiple accounts are allowed } 2603:8000:B640:3550:5D79:C382:CE05:17B3 (talk) 02:05, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This unblock request is wrongly formatted, so it won't be included in the list of pending unblock requests. I would correct that misformatting for you if you had posted the request from your account, but there's no point, because unblock requests made without logging into the relevant account aren't considered anyway.
I find it very difficult to reconcile these two edits [1] [2]] with what you have said above. JBW (talk) 21:58, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! What do you mean by this?"I find it very difficult to reconcile these two edits [1] [2]] " I always keep my feed clean. You can see the edits history that I always clean it. Here [2]] is literally a reply to the person who commented on the article I created. J2009j (talk) 22:18, 30 September 2024 (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).

J2009j (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am repeating the same again. How is this related? This is an older account I have had. It was never used for any votes or anything similar with another account. Please, go ahead and verify yourself. The log in is saved on different devices. I used whatever the page was open. You wrote yourself that- Note that multiple accounts are allowed.

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. 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. asilvering (talk) 04:22, 27 October 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.

Note to any administrator reviewing this unblock request:

This editor has been evading the block by logged-out editing while this request has been pending. I am not declining the request, as I blocked the account, but otherwise I certainly would do so. JBW (talk) 20:22, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You never replied to my comment. Why are you avoiding it? I am not allowed to edit pages I want whenever I want? Is there a wikipedia "rule" that I have to put maybe my ID, or people are required to "log in", or to put maybe their passport? I am genuinely asking. Do you know that wikipedia page is not saved in log in, and nobody is going around paying attention to that.

I make a draft and these editors go and delete it. Everyone can make as many drafts as they want. I added a draft and put there new sources I have, and the editors goes and deleted it. Was I submitting it or what? I am not allowed to create a draft, and adding new information there? I was editing it and other wikipedia users were editing it too. Looks like vandalism to me. What can you say @Liz?

People are not allowed to create draft? @JBW , can you explain what problem that editor @S0091 has with the draft based on information i collected a long time, in a lot of languages and sites? Draft:Afsheen People are not allowed to created draft because someone does not like it? I can define this as vandalism. Why is this editor not spending time looking for aticles on wikipedia that are approved and that do not meet the notability criteria and have zero reliable sources? Or maybe those who message people online offering 600$ for to approve wikipedia page? J2009j (talk) 22:21, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Correct, you are not allowed to edit pages you want whenever you want. You the person have been indefinitely blocked from English Wikipedia, not just one account, which means that you are not allowed to edit at all, whether logged out or logged in on any account. The only exception is on this talk page, for the sole purpose of discussing your block in a constructive fashion. You should review WP:OFFER as it likely represents your only chance of editing again someday. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 22:49, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

None of your editors ever replied to any of the point I made. Do not see how is that constructive at all. J2009j (talk) 23:27, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There were pages and pages of discussion in those Afsheen articles you kept redrafting under slightly different names, all of which you entirely ignored.

In any case, you basically have two options. You can follow WP:OFFER. Or you can continue to use your talk page as you currently are, and continue to insult and throw accusations at the admins and evade blocks. Only the first option leads to any real possibilty of you being able to freely edit articles again. What you choose to do is up to you. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 03:07, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@CoffeeCrumbs You did no even pay attention to what I wrote. Nothing constructive again. Don't you see? What are the "different names" you are talking about?

Did you see that there are a dozen of wikipedia pages such as Rebel Heart, Lindsey Stirling and many sources online spelling the name in different ways such as AFSheeN, and AFSHEEN all caps. My appologies, I do not have knowledge which one is the right one. What does "There were pages and pages of discussion in those Afsheen articles you kept redrafting under slightly different names, all of which you entirely ignored." even means?

Seems more like I am being harassed by some random editors, because nobody was able to even say what issues they have with my accounts, never used for any violations, and i also said it is my account, one on laptop and one old on desktop computer. J2009j (talk) 04:33, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure whether it's WP:CIR or WP:IDHT, but I already gave you the best advice I could on what your realistic options are, so I wish you the best of luck. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 07:15, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what you mean by your "feed", or by keeping it clean, but can you explain why you used the account Demeter39G to edit User talk:J2009j, and then one minute later use the account J2009j to revert that edit? There may be a perfectly good reason; if so it will help if you can let us know what that reason is. Many administrators will have seen this kind if thing many times, and there is a very common reason why it happens, but unless you tell us, we can't know whether that reason applies in this case, or whether you had some other reason. JBW (talk) 13:08, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I mean the talk page. I always keep it clean. I noticed that I accidentally removed the the block that had the button to reply, and maybe some Information I needed to remember. What is the issue about that? It was never used for any votes or anything similar with another account. Please, go ahead and verify yourself. J2009j (talk) 18:14, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@JBW they have also been editing as an IP therefore evading their block. See 2603:8001:A400:774E:84C4:1A44:F83C:E338/64 where they recreated Draft:Afsheen and edited Draft:Jane Skripnik. S0091 (talk) 14:24, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me, what? I keep getting emails from you. Can you explain what is your problem because I do not understand it? Everyone is allowed to have sit Wikipedia and add information they want. Excuse me, some people do not say in Wikipedia 24/7 and make edits as they want so how does that bother you? I am sorry, my log in does not getting saved, and I do not even pay attention to whatever edits I make. I’d like to know is there something illegal in content I add or what? No. Wikipedia is not your property. This lsounds like an attack.What block am I evading and for what illegal activity? I and everyone else is allowed to edit their Wikipedia articles. I also have information about a concert venue I am interested to make a page about. Did not have time for that. What issue do you have with my contribution? Did I go make some kind of votes somewhere, or comment on some kind of discussions on Wikipedia with the account or what. I edit whatever i want and improve my contribution. My friends contribute too, so what issues you have , because i know my friends edited with me together. Draft:Afsheen

Let me know if you don’t like this ip. I have a phone too , and have no idea what is a Wikipedia password. I did not know I have no care and specifically look for that because you are not ok with my phone or my devices. 2600:382:2723:9141:4D3E:4E6D:149C:3C43 (talk) 15:36, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am tagging here specifically @JBW, can you explain what problem that editor @S0091 has with the draft based on information i collected a long time, in a lot of languages and sites? Draft:Afsheen People are not allowed to created draft because someone does not like it? I can define this as vandalism. Why is this editor not spending time looking for aticles on wikipedia that are approved and that do not meet the notability criteria and have zero reliable sources? Or maybe those who message people online offering 600$ for to approve wikipedia page?

I do not see what issues this editor has with my account. What is the issue about my account? They want me to put a picture of my driving license on my page or what? It was never used for any votes or anything similar with another account. Please, go ahead and verify yourself. J2009j (talk) 18:52, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An attempt at clarification

From various things you have said above, it seems that you misunderstand several issues relating to your being blocked. The following is an attempt to clarify some of the issues.

You seem to think that anyone has a right to post anything they like to Wikipedia. That is not so. Anyone may contribute to Wikipedia, provided that they do so in accordance with the aims, policies, and guidelines of Wikipedia, and in cooperative collaboration with other editors. Editing not in accordance with those requirements is not permitted.
You have a history of unconstructive editing, and in particular a persistent failure to constructively cooperate with other editors. In order to put a stop to the disruption you were causing, you were, in the first instance, blocked from editing one page where you had been causing problems. You were, at that time, free to edit any other page.
Since then you have continued to edit in unacceptable ways. You have attempted to get round the effect of blocking this account by using another account, and by editing without using an account. Because you have continued to edit in unacceptable ways, the block has been extended. The original block from editing one page was for the purpose of preventing you from editing that page, not for the purpose of preventing you from editing that page using this account but allowing you to use it provided you didn't use this account. Likewise with the subsequent blocks: avoiding the blocks by using other accounts, or by not using an account, is not acceptable.
I have no idea what you mean by your comments about your passport and your driving license. Likewise I have no idea why you keep on saying things about using accounts for votes, since as far as I know nobody has raised any questions relating to votes.
I have no idea why you keep asking me what S0091 thinks. If you wish to know what S0091 thinks then ask S0091.
There is just one way of being allowed to return to editing. That way is to persuade an administrator that you understand the reasons for the blocks, and will not do the things that led to the block again. Instead, pretty well every edit you make provides further confirmation that you do not understand the reasons for the block, and that you will do the same things again.
If you continue to attempt to evade the blocks, you will make it very unlikely that you will ever be unblocked. (Since you don't seem to be clear as to what evading a block means, it means editing while the block is still there, either by using another account or by editing without using an account.) I therefore very strongly advise you not to try to evade the block.
I have taken the time and trouble to write all this in the hope that it will help you to understand the situation. However, on the past editors have tried to explain things to you, and you don't seem to have understood what they have said. If this attempt has likewise failed, then there's probably no point in trying any further explanation. JBW (talk) 11:17, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

S0091 thinks J2009j needs to read WP:EVADE and take on board all the feedback they have been given by various editors during the time they have editing here. For the record, I did not participate in the deletion discussion that led to Afsheen (musician) being deleted (anyone can verify that) or request Draft:Afsheen be deleted (an admin can verify that) and I certainly have never emailed this editor (a check user can verify that if they deem it necessary and within policy do so). S0091 (talk) 15:09, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I do not agree with your points. There is no rule that say I am not allowed to create a dew draft for the topic that was previously deleted, because i found new sources to complete it. Noe of your editors even checked it, but they just deleted it, while there were my contribution and contribution of other people.Correct me if I am wrong, what was i doing that is against your policies of editing? Do you mean removing not reliable sources, removing the language that is not the best is not ok? J2009j (talk) 19:59, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One more time, J2009j, you are wrong. When one is blocked that person should not edit Wikipedia at all outside of their talk page. As both CoffeeCrumbs and JBW have tried to explain to you, blocks apply to the person, in this case you, not a particular account. That includes editing logged out as an IP or with another account. You created Draft:Afsheen under an IP address while being blocked which is NOT allowed. Again, read WP:EVADE. Any edit you make while you are blocked may be reverted, whether is a "good" edit or not, and any page you create may be deleted. Whether you agree or not means nothing. These are non-negotiable policies for which you must follow if you ever want to be unblocked. Period. S0091 (talk) 20:22, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, my attempt to help fell on deaf ears, as I feared it might, but hoped it wouldn't. The following is my very last attempt to help you.

I refuse to be drawn into answering straw man arguments, such as your nonsense about "removing the language that is not the best is not ok". Nobody said that.

You say that you don't agree with my "points". My "points" were attempts to explain to you what the relevant Wikipedia policies are. If you "disagree with [my] points", in other words think that I'm mistaken about what the relevant policies are, then that's up to you, but I have been a Wikipedia administrator for 14 years, and I assure you that I do know what those policies are.

Your ability to edit on this page has not been blocked, for just one purpose. That purpose is to enable you to make an unblock request. Above, in the paragraph beginning "There is just one way of being allowed ..." I have told you briefly what such a request needs to do, and further detail is in Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks, which I suggest you read, if you haven't already done so.

If you continue to use your ability to edit this page in any other way than requesting unblocking, or if you request unblocking in ways which don't comply with what you have been told, then your ability to edit this page is likely to be withdrawn, without further warning. JBW (talk) 20:52, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]