User talk:PikyoSeoul20

June 2023

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Lisa Wilkinson have been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Lisa Wilkinson was changed by PikyoSeoul20 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.95622 on 2023-06-08T12:57:45+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 12:57, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for violations of Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text at the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Courcelles (talk) 13:55, 8 June 2023 (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).

PikyoSeoul20 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Adding controversial information about the concerned celebrity that has the support of references within the media. I understand the reasons as to my violation and will never make such remarks again on Wikipedia. PikyoSeoul20 (talk) 14:19, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

That's not what you were doing, so I don't think you understand this block. Comments like this have no place here. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 15:11, 8 June 2023 (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: I see. I almost forgot about that comment. I now understand the reasons behind my block on Wikipedia and I would like to take this reply to sincerely apologise for my actions. I understand that I went too far when it comes to this edit and how serious this case is. Although there are resources that the celebrity in question was involved in the victim's case, I believe the wording could have been more user-friendly or perhaps I should not have gone to the extent to write my edit. I cannot stress enough how bad I now feel as a result of this edit, I'm truly sorry this has happened and I promise that if I am unblocked in the future I will never write such edits again and think before I edit in front of the entire Wikipedia community. Thank you for your attention. Have a nice day :) PikyoSeoul20 (talk) 04:48, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You may make a new request for someone else to review(on wiki). I would suggest that you not use an AI bot to write it. 331dot (talk) 07:51, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello 331dot. How are you? Hope you're well. I need some help with my appeal key. I applied for an unblock request for my Wikipedia account PikyoSeoul20 but the problem is that I forgot to take note of the appeal key and cannot retrieve it. Is there anything I can do to retrieve the appeal key or is there anything you can do to help me with my issue. I look forward to hearing from you soon.

Kind Regards,

PikyoSeoul20 PikyoSeoul20 (talk) 06:16, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS appeal #74560

is closed. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:32, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS appeal #74928

is closed. User is warned to stop deliberately wasting our time. --Yamla (talk) 11:03, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Yamla.

How are you? Hope you are well.

I did state in my appeal that I felt really bad for what I have done and that I would think about my actions before completing them in a courteous manner. I also stated that I will never make such edits in the near future.

Although disappointed by the status of my appeal, I understand this decision. I am open for feedback on the reasons behind your decline and the ways I can make Wikipedia more safe and generous for the wider online community.

Kind Regards,

PikyoSeoul20 PikyoSeoul20 (talk) 13:52, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Yamla.

I also forgot to mention that I need help with using the talk page to make a request.

I am hoping that you could help me out.

Kind Regards

PikyoSeoul20 PikyoSeoul20 (talk) 14:01, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Yamla.

This will be my last reply

I no longer need assistance in using my user talk page. You can find my proper appeal down below.

Thank you for your assistance.

Kind Regards,

PikyoSeoul20 PikyoSeoul20 (talk) 14:15, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New Appeal

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).

PikyoSeoul20 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Dear Wikipedia Administrators, I am writing this appeal to request that my Wikipedia account be unblocked. My account was blocked one week ago due to my actions that violated Wikipedia's guidelines.

My actions involved the addition of a 'fake rape victim doormat' as a description of Lisa Wilkinson, the living person in question. This was added to her Wikipedia article page as a result of my personal grudge towards Lisa Wilkinson as a reporter as well as her involvement in the recent Brittany Higgins case. This edit led to my indefinite block on Wikipedia by administrators. If I were given the chance to refine the edit in a different way, it would be so that the wording could be changed to a vocabulary that is not explicit or derogatory and more user-friendly. The refined edit should have been cited with sources from trustworthy media and should've been written in the controversies section and not in the main description at the top of the article. I would also refine the edit so that it explains in more detail Lisa Wilkinson's involvement in the Brittany Higgins case. Another alternative would have been to think about my pending actions and convince myself to not write the edit in the first place. I must admit that the edit was a complete spur of moment and that I was not fully aware of the violations on Wikipedia. I now understand and realise the negative impact my actions had on the entire Wikipedia community and I truly feel bad for the action I committed. I also understand that the term ‘rape’ is extremely sensitive and traumatic especially to rape victims and anyone involved in a rape case. I am ready to take full responsibility for my mistakes.

I'm truly sorry this has happened and I promise that if I am unblocked in the future I will never write such edits again and think before I edit in front of the entire Wikipedia community. Thank you for your attention. Yours sincerely,

PikyoSeoul20 PikyoSeoul20 (talk) 14:13, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I find it concerning that you still want to edit the biography in question. I think it would be preferable if you did not edit the biography at all. PhilKnight (talk) 15:03, 17 June 2023 (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.

@PhilKnight: Hello PhilKnight. Hope you're well. I agree with you. It would be best if I did not make such edits at all. What I was trying to say in my request was that I am still remorseful for the actions I committed last week and that if I were unblocked again, I would make an edit based on true sources and respectful language, not just on the biography of the living person in question but on any living person's biography.

Thank you for your consideration. From PikyoSeoul20

New Unblock Appeal

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).

PikyoSeoul20 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Dear Wikipedia Administrators,

I am writing this appeal to request that my Wikipedia account be unblocked again. My account was blocked on 8th June 2023 due to my actions that violated Wikipedia's living persons guidelines. More details on my block can be found on my declined request above.

After understanding the extent of my actions on the community, it would have been best if I did not write the edit in the first place or make any edits on the biography of the living question in the near future. I would also never make such edits on the biography of any person, living or deceased, for that matter.

I am still adamant that I will make edits that would certainly be useful to Wikipedia. Once again, I’m very sorry this has happened and I promise that if I am unblocked in the future I will never write such edits again.

Thank you for your attention.

Kind Regards, PikyoSeoul20 PikyoSeoul20 (talk) 03:25, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I don't see you doing any good for this project if you were to be unblocked. You can try the standard offer when the time comes. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 14:57, 20 June 2023 (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.

PikyoSeoul20 (talk) 03:25, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Seraphimblade: Hello Seraphimblade. Thank you very much for getting back to me. While disappointed and guttered to learn of the verdict surrounding my recent unblock appeal, I understand and accept this decision. I cannot stress enough how much this issue has made me feel guilty and depressed both on and off the screen. Although you may not envision my changed attitude until the time comes for me to be unblocked, I can assure you that I will change my ways and that I can be a more useful, knowledgeable and trustworthy editor here on Wikipedia. I will be trying the Standard Offer in six months' time as recommended by you and I shall be adamant and true to my words...and don't mind the "garbage" Croucelles cited; that 6-year-old edit was all for fun and was definitely not severe as my recent 'doormat' edit.

Thank you for your reply, Kind Regards, PikyoSeoul20

After seeing the "doormat" edit, I honestly wouldn't be comfortable unblocking you unless you agreed to refrain from editing any biographies of living persons at all, indefinitely. That does not mean "permanently"; if you show a solid history of neutral and good-quality editing in other areas, with much better judgment than you demonstrated there, that restriction could be lifted at some point in the future. But do keep in mind that, especially for people who are not major celebrities or extremely well known, their biography on Wikipedia may be the first thing that shows up on search engines when their name is entered, and so unreferenced negative claims and derogatory remarks on such a biography could be extremely damaging to such an individual. That is why we take BLP so seriously. So, would you be willing to agree to a restriction from editing any BLP articles if you were unblocked? Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 18:11, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Am I the only one getting ChatGPT vibes off these appeals? Courcelles (talk) 18:19, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, you're not, though unfortunately there's never any way to tell with much certainty. Apparently even the bot-detection checkers aren't tremendously accurate. But that's one reason why I like to ask a question it would be really tough for a chatbot to give any kind of coherent answer to. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 18:27, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Courcelles

How are you? I hope you're well.

I can assure that you that ChatGPT or any other AI bot was not used when writing these messages and replies. They were genuinely written by me.

This is the same writing style I have adapted throughout my secondary schooling and at university and has received positive feedback from teachers, students and family members alike. Are you impressed? Lol

Kind Regards,

PikyoSeoul20 PikyoSeoul20 (talk) 06:18, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Seraphimblade.

Thank you for your reply. I'm happy to say that I do agree with you and I'm happy for a restriction to be placed on me if I am unblocked. I promise that from now on I will become a more thoughtful and trustful editor on Wikipedia.

Kind Regards,

PikyoSeoul20 PikyoSeoul20 (talk) 06:13, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Courcelles, would you be okay with an unblock on condition that this editor may not edit any BLPs? Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 14:48, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not really, no. These LLM appeals are worthless. I’d revoke talk page access and forget about this. “editor”. Courcelles (talk) 14:49, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And the garbage has been here for years despite the like 8 edits before the indef. Courcelles (talk) 14:52, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]