User talk:Keeeeper

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia

Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
No edit warring or sock puppetry
If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject. Deliberately adding such content or otherwise editing articles maliciously is considered vandalism; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Biker Biker (talk) 13:49, 5 September 2011 (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).

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

Request reason:

It is a mistake, I am innocent. I have no idea who Iaaasi is. I've read this investigation [1] and one administrator said: "I doubt this is the same user", while other said it is only a "possible match" (not a certain match). I did not break any wiki policy, all my edits were done in good faith and I really think this sanction is undeserved.

Decline reason:

Behavioral evidence seems to be clear that this account is opperated by the same person as the Iaaasi account. Jayron32 04:51, 11 September 2011 (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).

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

Request reason:

"Behavioral evidence" so any Romanian who will try to edit at some specific articles who shares huge political Hungarian interest will be held as potential "Iaaasi" users? That's not a good reason at all, in fact you should bring more evidence to support your decision, please do tell me what kind of IPs that user Iaaasi used, is he from the same part of Romania as I am? Or did we made the same articles, meaning that he wrote exactly what I wrote? I think the decision was rushed, this kind of decisions doesn't affects only me, but half of the city that I live in, because you should know that most of the networks from our country are Dial-Up or Broadband (DSL/Cable) connections and the IPs are dynamic meaning that this rushed decision banned half of the city who use the same provider. I request a real proof if you can at least demonstrate if me and Iaaasi are from the same regional placement from Romania (same region, same city or same network provider). My edit on 1848–1849 massacres in Transylvania were done after reading the remarks on the article talk page, that I completely agreed with.

Decline reason:

You wrote precisely the same thing with your first edit on this account as you did with your Iaaasi account. If you want to edit constructively, then we could perhaps work something out, but we do not allow abusive sock-puppetry. AGK [•] 21:54, 12 September 2011 (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.

Is it just conceivable ...

... that we could have a miscarriage of justice here?

I can actually think of quite a few different scenarios. I'm not trying to cause trouble, honest I'm not, but WP:DUCK is not an infallible rule, and (for example, in the scenario where someone might willfully be trying to cause trouble), it's not exactly hard to copy-paste someone else's words in order to impersonate them and get them blocked for a further several months, knowing that WP:DUCK will be likely to be applied. It's a rut which is all too easy for someone to ensure that another editor stays in. There must surely be some better way forward? (Adding) For example, could IP ranges be checked against "known enemies / opposers" ? Pesky (talk …stalk!) 09:12, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]