User talk:Joaquin89uy

Archives

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:51, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Creation of an article on Wikipedia

Hello!

I really like the articles you create, publish or edit on Wikipedia. I’m not a Wikipedia specialist, so I would like to collaborate with a professional who has experience in this field. I would like to publish an article about Oskar Hartmann, entrepreneur, business angel and international investor, on the German or English version of Wikipedia.

I see it as a text about his professional career, investments and philosophy of life. Not PR or advertising articles. My name is Emma Rogers

Let me know if you are interested in describing Hartmann's biography as an author, please. I can give you more information RogEmma (talk) 08:15, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

China Jialing moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, China Jialing, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Dan arndt (talk) 07:27, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:56, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sockpuppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below.

Yamla (talk) 12:40, 8 March 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).

Joaquin89uy (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

@Yamla I'm not a sockpuppet lol. Don't even know what else to add, tbh. I don't know who blocked me or why or any of you people mentioned here. Joaquin89uy (talk) 15:22, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

A simple denial is insufficient, as every sock puppet denies being one, since that is the whole point. 331dot (talk) 21:43, 8 March 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.

@331dot (talk) 21:43, 8 March 2024 (UTC)}} What do I have to do to prove my point?? And who called me out as a sockpuppet?? This is ridiculous. Like, shouldn't I get a warning first, at least?? Plus, I have a clean record, and plenty of clean contributions that you can easily check out, etc. Today I went around, trying to get to the bottom of this, and all I found was a comment from Yamla, on Cococ2001's talk page, saying: "Simple denial is insufficient. Additionally, Confirmed to Onesgje9g334 and Joaquin89uy, which I will go and block immediately.". What does that last sentence even mean? "Confirmed to" and then my name?? But confirmed to what? By whom? - Joaquin89uy (talk) 22:46, 8 March 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).

Joaquin89uy (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

@Yamla What do I have to do to prove my point?? And who called me out as a sockpuppet?? This is ridiculous. Like, shouldn't I get a warning first, at least?? Plus, I have a clean record, and plenty of clean contributions that you can easily check out, etc. Today I went around, trying to get to the bottom of this, and all I found was a comment from Yamla, on Cococ2001's talk page, saying: "Simple denial is insufficient. Additionally, Confirmed to Onesgje9g334 and Joaquin89uy, which I will go and block immediately.". What does that last sentence even mean? "Confirmed to" and then my name?? But confirmed to what? By whom? - Joaquin89uy (talk) 05:55, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You don't make much of an argument for unblock, but I will at least answer your questions. "Confirmed to ..." means that the Checkuser tool returned sufficient evidence for Yamla to conclude that these accounts are operated by the same person.

No, we never warn people when we find sockpuppetry. You got your warning when you began editing. Daniel Case (talk) 07:38, 9 March 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.

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).

Joaquin89uy (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

@Yamla Okay, now i went around the logs and found out what this all is about. Let's see. I'm from Uruguay. That is in South America. I'm simply not an arab, nor a german. Never been there, nor am I a part of any such group you seem to think I am. Can you check out my IP location? I think there are two ways of clearing this that are self evident. One is by checking my IP location, and the other is if you check my contributions. I have NEVER made ANY contributions to any Qatar-related articles. Not even close. Also, check your Checkuser tool, because I dont know why i'm being associated with these folks. And now Im curious about it lol. - Joaquin89uy (talk) 08:21, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Technical data makes it clear that at the very least, this account is being shared with someone who is operating two other accounts, including Cococ2001. Request declined. --Blablubbs (talk) 02:28, 29 March 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.

See WP:CHECKME. 331dot (talk) 15:33, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot @Yamla Thanks. I didn't know that. So I'm getting that this particular wiki doesn't do IP checks. Ok. Going back to the subject at hand, the other day I went further down the investigation's rabbit hole, and used the tools that appeared on the investigation page to see if something weird popped up with my account and the account of any of the other blocked users. The only thing that I could find, using the Interaction Timeline tool, that was "close" to anything, was that I edited the Argentina national football team page 9 MONTHS before "Cococ2001" did. Could that be it? Also, in case I haven't said it yet, this is my only account. I live in Uruguay, and speak spanish. I also know english decently, as you can see. I made this account and the spanish wiki one at the same time, which should be easy to check by anyone. (They both have also the same name). I've made plenty contributions on both. Lately, my internet searches are mostly Argentina's or US's politics, and maybe some world history. I like both politics and history in general. I also could have edited some pages about India years ago, since for a time I was interested in indian culture and religion. Maybe some of that data helps? - Joaquin89uy (talk) 17:48, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Only a checkuser can authorize the removal of this block, so only they can tell you what might help. 331dot (talk) 19:19, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. - Joaquin89uy (talk) 12:18, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Alison @Aoidh Hello! Could you please check my case? I've already described my situation in the 3 previous posts here on my talk page, and Im willing to answer any further questions or any extra data you may need. Thank you! - Joaquin89uy (talk) 12:01, 24 March 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).

Joaquin89uy (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

@Blablubbs Ok, so now I'm thinking further along the line. And wider beyond just Wikipedia. About a year ago, I tried to download a videogame, and I accidentally downloaded a trojan virus. I was hacked, and my Instagram and Reddit accounts got compromised. Since then, I changed my passwords and moved on. This account/user may be also compromised. If I change my password that might change, though. Any thoughts? (Update: I've changed my password a week ago.) - Joaquin89uy (talk) 19:54, 7 April 2024 (UTC))[reply]

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only. This unblock request has been open for more than two weeks but has not proven sufficient for any reviewing administrator to take action, or you have not responded to questions raised during that time. You are welcome to request a new block review if you substantially reword your request. 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) 18:53, 19 June 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.

If your system and account are compromised, that would mean that this account must remain blocked as a standard security measure, see WP:COMPROMISED. 331dot (talk) 20:12, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot Should I open a new one... or what would you suggest? - Joaquin89uy (talk) 21:57, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That would just compound the sockpuppet issue. 331dot (talk) 22:11, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot What if I change the password on this one? - Joaquin89uy (talk) 01:53, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot I've finally changed the password on this account 2 days ago. It should now be safe. - Joaquin89uy (talk) 19:22, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot @Blablubbs @Yamla - Hi. Just to remind you guys that i'm still blocked. It's been 2 months. I've changed my password 2 months ago.

I'm guessing that that is maybe not enough, and that, maybe, that is why you never answered(?.

If there is anything else that I should do, let me know. Thank you. - Joaquin89uy (talk) 14:03, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have no intention of lifting this block. --Yamla (talk) 14:50, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I too have no intention of lifting this block. At a minimum, you need to follow the guidance at WP:COMPROMISED but that's not the only issue here. 331dot (talk) 07:06, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot As for the guidelines at WP:COMPROMISED, I've read them, and I'm thinking of rejoining an old group of uruguayan wikipedians I was once in, then sending pictures of me with them, so you can see I'm a real person. Then at least we can settle that one matter at least. For starters. - Joaquin89uy (talk) 08:19, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:China Jialing

Hello, Joaquin89uy. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:China Jialing, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 08:05, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:China Jialing

Hello, Joaquin89uy. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "China Jialing".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:23, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]