User talk:ProWikiD

Unblock

This blocked user's request to have autoblock on their IP address lifted has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request.

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

96.225.77.69 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

Block message:

Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "Migsbigs". The reason given for Migsbigs's block is: "Personal attacks or harassment".

Blocking administrator: Rschen7754 (talk • blocks)

Decline reason: Nope, just talked to a CheckUser and you're the same person that I just blocked. Rs chen 7754 03:36, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Side Note: Other users on this IP address. Please unban. Thank you.

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet of Migsbigs (talk · contribs · global contribs · page moves · user creation · block log) that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Rs chen 7754 03:34, 18 May 2013 (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).

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

Request reason:

Your reason here ProWikiD (talk) 10:48 pm, Today (UTC−5) Administrator Rschen7754, I do not know what proof to give to you, but I am not this user that you speak of. Sincerely, ProWikiD

Decline reason:

CU Confirmed abuse of multiple accounts. —DoRD (talk) 03:56, 18 May 2013 (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).

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

Request reason:

Hello Administrators of Wikipedia,

I will make one last attempt at explaining what has happened.

The "Guide to appealing blocks" states that saying the following is a legitimate reason: "that your conduct (under any account or IP address) is not connected in any way with the block (this can happen if a block is aimed at resolving a separate situation and you are unintentionally blocked as a result because you use the same IP range)." Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Guide_to_appealing_blocks

I respectfully disagree with your conclusion. I am not the same user, hence do not deserve this unexpected ban. I have figured out who the irresponsible owner of account:[Migsbigs] is and have taken action to prevent this user from having access to Wikipedia from this IP address indefinitely.

I made my account a few hours ago so that I would not only be a user who accepts information from the Wikipedia community but also one who gives back useful, thoughtful, clear, and accurate information back to the community.

Once again, my only intentions are to add, not take away, from the Wikipedia community. Please take my one last request into serious consideration; let me know your final conclusion.

Sincerely, ProWikiD

Updates to Wikipedia Staff and Administration

Note: All emails have been sent from my currently registered email.

I have also sent an email to the Wikipedia staff (5/18/13 at 9:52 EST) to look at my talk page. I have not received a response from the administration.
I have sent a second email to the Wikipedia Arbitration Committee (5/18/13 at 10:07 AM EST) to look at my legitimate reason as well.

Decline reason:

I just verified; the checkuser results are quite unambiguous. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 14:17, 18 May 2013 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

Is there anything else that can be done about the unjust conclusions? I am currently struggling with your administration team. I am being honest about the fact "I have figured out who the irresponsible owner of account:[Migsbigs] is and have taken action to prevent this user from having access to Wikipedia from this IP address indefinitely. " (from previous unblock request). I am so definite about my case that: if you see another abusive edit/contribution/message/action from my IP at all again, you may block this account indefinitely. ProWikiD (talk) 14:41, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I'm sorry, but given the evidence (particularly that below), it's quite clear that Migsbigs and this account are the same person. Admitting that instead of trying to end-around the evidence would be a good start to getting unblocked. (And you will need to request unblocking on your original account, which I presume, in this case, would be Migsbigs.) The Bushranger _{One ping only} 17:09, 18 May 2013 (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.

Note to reviewing admin: Immediately following this warning to Migsbigs, but in the moment right before Migsbigs was blocked, the same IP created User:Ss1kiosk and this account in quick succession. The conclusion is fairly obvious. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 15:03, 18 May 2013 (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).

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

Request reason:

Hello kind Bushranger, I completely understand why Wikipedia believes that I am a sock puppet of Migsbigs, and I probably should have explained the situation further. The 'user' had logged into my computer with the malicious intent of banning/blocking me from Wikipedia. By making the first two alts, and entering in my email, he was able to successfully block me from Wikipedia, after I had told him my idea of becoming an editor on Wikipedia. The fact that I told him my goal ended up harming me in the end. Please understand my concern. Again, I am sorry for the hassle this has created for both the Wikipedia administration and staff. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, ProWikiD ProWikiD (talk) 19:34, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

As below by Rschen. SQL ^{Query me!} 08:46, 19 May 2013 (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.

I am removing access to your talk page - you have had enough appeals. Any further appeals need to be addressed to WP:UTRS or the Arbitration Committee. --Rs chen 7754 20:50, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have protected this page for the time being. SQL ^{Query me!} 08:47, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notes

This user has been persistently contacting other users on IRC, including myself, and advanced several different incompatible versions of his explanation for why he was blocked. After I noted the inconsistencies of these stories, he admitted to me that he was lying. He has created several new socks, including User:DelightedFrog and User:JustBerry, despite warnings not to do so. I strongly advise anyone contacting the user to disregard any claims that he makes and to not take any action on his behalf. Dcoetzee 05:54, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]