User talk:Jiangye

Jiangye, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Jiangye! 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 experienced editors like Missvain (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:03, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

January 2019

You are suspected of sock puppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, then, if you wish to do so, respond to the evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jiangye. Thank you. ∰Bellezzasolo✡ Discuss 19:07, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. 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 for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 16:01, 10 January 2019 (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).

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

Request reason:

I just used 2 accounts prior to Editing Ever Night page. I created my second account because of the other Editor doesn't stop arguing with me even I have references. He resumes Editing false information of the page disregarding my revision. He doesn't have references either, the references he said was already on the page before it was edited. Continue Editing without the knowledge of the page and claiming he doesn't own is an offense right? He should be the one to be blocked. Jiangye (talk) 00:04, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

See WP:NOTTHEM. You engaged in sockpuppetry to gain the upper hand in a discussion; that's what you'll need to address. Huon (talk) 00:09, 11 January 2019 (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).

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

Request reason:

The block is no longer necessary because I understand what I are blocked for, I will not do it again, and I will make productive contributions instead. I'm sorry for what I did. I promise, I won't do it again and respect the rules of Editing thereof.

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. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 03:51, 11 January 2019 (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 blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

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

UTRS appeal #23741 was submitted on Jan 11, 2019 02:58:37. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 02:58, 11 January 2019 (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).

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

Request reason:

The block is no longer necessary because I understand what I are blocked for and will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and will make useful contributions instead.. Jiangye (talk) 04:39, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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. You need to explain, not just copypaste policy. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 04:50, 11 January 2019 (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.

Pardon? I am not copypasting policy here. And up until now, I have been blocked. That's ridiculous. I am only contributing correct information of the certain content. But, someone keeps editing the content that is not right those days. I'm sorry, but I was wronged there. Jiangye (talk) 07:11, 10 June 2021 (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).

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

Request reason:

You don't need to further block me, because I won't use multiple accounts any longer. I also post an edit summary of all my edits so that's it can be reviewed. I hope you understand and grant my request. Thank you.Jiangye (talk) 06:09, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You haven't convinced me. Your actions deliberately destroyed Wikipedia's trust in you. You behaved dishonestly in an attempt to push your position. The only thing that seems to have changed is that you got caught. And even when you did, you blamed others instead of your own dishonest actions. I think we are done here. Come back in six months and apply under WP:SO. At that point, you'll need to show you've stayed away from Wikipedia and you take personal responsibility for your dishonest actions. Yamla (talk) 11:16, 11 January 2019 (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.

Per this, declined unblock requests should not be removed from a user talk page while the user is still blocked. --bonadea contributions talk 06:17, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock Resolution

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).

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

Request reason:

I understand why you blocked me. And I will no longer fight for it cause I am tired convincing you guys. All I wanted is to please review the page I am Editing. I admit I am responsible for any unstable changes of the page. It is because the other Editor wanted to prove his point and asked me references. I told my sources and my explanation. However, he ignored me. Even the fact, It is I who edited it first. No matter what. I am done here.

If ever some people will look at the page, there will be another who will try to edit and won't stop them because of the missing information and false information. Jiangye (talk) 04:09, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

The last admin to decline your request already gave you the WP:Standard offer. Other admins will not override that decision. I suggest you take the offer. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:57, 12 January 2019 (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.