User talk:MelvynMangion

Blocked as a sockpuppet

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Josscerri per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Josscerri. 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 ~~~~}}. clpo13_(talk) 07:29, 23 November 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).

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

Request reason:

I have no connection whatsoever with Josscerri. I do not know who he or she is. It is impossible that someone used my IP address. I edited the text given that I was looking up for info on Tonio Borg, and the info which is published on wikipedia is not complete. The published info is only the negative news about this person. I included the positive news too. The info which I included was previously included on wikipedia but was removed by someone. I re-posted the info which was previously published. This is backed up by facts. I believe that readers should be given the full information about someone and not only the negative info. This leads to better transparency. MelvynMangion (talk) 09:31, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You made the virtually the exact same edit as two other users(including Josscerri). It is difficult to accept this as a coincidence. Even if you are different people, this is considered meatpuppetry. 331dot (talk) 09:58, 23 November 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).

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

Request reason:

In my appeal, I made it clear that I re-posted what was posted by others. This is due to the fact that what Josscerri posted was true and fair. I deemed it unfair that the page was edited by someone who did not include any positive information about Tonio Borg. If need be, I can repost the same data using different wording. However, I can only do so if you kindly unblock me. My goal is to publish the truth and not allow the profile of Tonio Borg to only feature rather negative news. This is unjust for both Tonio Borg and worldwide readers. Wikipedia should give the whole picture of any of the persons mentioned on its site MelvynMangion (talk) 10:18, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

It was inappropriate for you to make that edit. It seems likely you were violating WP:MEAT but even if you weren't, you were reintroducing content that was correctly removed, as it was not appropriately cited. Yamla (talk) 17:35, 23 November 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.

Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources say, irrespective of whether it is positive or negative. Your edit was unsourced. Someone else will review your request. 331dot (talk) 11:55, 23 November 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).

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

Request reason:

It was the first time I used wikipedia. I can learn how to source what I wrote. I can easily do so. I already have such links. I just need to learn how to do include them. I kindly ask you to unblock me so I can carry out such a fair exercise MelvynMangion (talk) 17:52, 23 November 2021 (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. 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) 14:17, 12 December 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.

Kindly unblock. I explained what happened in the above posts. MelvynMangion (talk) 08:17, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Only one open request is needed at a time. It will be reviewed by a volunteer, please be patient. 331dot (talk) 17:57, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]