User talk:Jacob Lopeson

January 2021

This is your only warning; if you make personal attacks on others again, as you did at User talk:Scottywong, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. BusterD (talk) 20:15, 26 January 2021 (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).

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

Request reason:

I don't get what I did wrong. Can someone please clarify this?

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. Yamla (talk) 18:58, 17 May 2021 (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 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).

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

Request reason:

I understand why I was blocked. I won't let it happen again. I learned my lesson afterwords. I will make contributions and won't make attack users. I understand it was wrong what I did and won't let it happen again. Sorry for what I have done.

Decline reason:

The stated reason for the block is block evasion, but you do not discuss that in your request. 331dot (talk) 16:35, 18 May 2021 (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 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).

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

Request reason:

I know I was blocked for evasion but I will not let it happen again. As stated in my other appeal, I will make useful contributions (mainly to help Wikipedia), will not attack users anymore, or evade blocks. I did all those by mistake because I never knew about attack pages and block evasion. Even though I was blocked in January, I took my time to read the Wikipedia guidelines and now know about the guidelines. I will not let those happen again. I apologize for what I have done and it will not happen again.

Decline reason:

One open unblock at a time, please. — Daniel Case (talk) 18:53, 21 May 2021 (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.

If you are using this account to evade a block, you need to return to your original account to request unblock. I'm also curious(though I'm not reviewing this) why you need to be told that attack pages are wrong in order to not do it. 331dot (talk) 19:44, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot: I cannot create an appeal on the original account because I cannot edit my talk page, cannot send an appeal through the UTRS and that account is globally locked.

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).

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

Request reason:

I cannot appeal on my original account because I don't have talk page access, was banned from UTRS and that account was globally locked. Like I said before, I never knew what block evasion was, but now I do. Sorry for evading blocks. I did not do it on purposely. Also, I did not attack users on purposely. There is nothing else I can do since my original account is locked and is banned from using UTRS.

Decline reason:

If you are globally locked, you will need to contact a steward for assistance in getting that removed. There is nothing we can do for you here until then. 331dot (talk) 09:20, 26 May 2021 (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.

And what was the thought process behind edits like this? Can you explain how you thought that edit would be interpreted, if you didn't think it would be seen as a personal attack? Why have you created so many accounts? SQL ^{Query me!} 01:17, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@SQL: I wanted to try out the sockmaster tag, but it was reverted. I would not take that as a personal attack because personal attacks is just calling someone something mean or offensive. Also, I created multiple accounts because I never knew about sockpuppetry or block evasion (or the one editor one account) I tried to say that in my appeal for my original account/my other accounts but people would just not listen to me.