User talk:RoopeM

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).

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

Request reason:

I admitted using my colleague's unpublished work as a source which was an issue. I thought the link between those two accounts were already clarified and it was a non-issue per se but there was a perception of cross-promoting sources I believe. I also admit giving hard criticism on the person accusing me because of the poor quality of the article I was editing. I regret not saying it in a nicer way but I was already upset by the motives behind the accusations (I didn't say anything personal but did question the motives behind the accusations). Happy to clarify on any of the above points. If you can't remove the block, I would at least kindly ask you to remove certain, in my opinion, inaccurate language in the block description (harassment is really strong language and considering the PII concerns here, it's also potentially libelous.) Thank you for your understanding and helping with this.RoopeM (talk) 01:38, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Per above, but remember that only one request can be open at a time. — Daniel Case (talk) 22:57, 8 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).

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

Request reason:

I admitted using my colleague's unpublished work as a source which was an issue. I thought the link between those two accounts were already clarified and it was a non-issue per se but there was a perception of cross-promoting sources I believe. I also admit giving hard criticism on the person accusing me because of the poor quality of the article I was editing. I regret not saying it in a nicer way but I was already upset by the motives behind the accusations (I didn't say anything personal but did question the motives behind the accusations). Happy to clarify on any of the above points. If you can't remove the block, I would at least kindly ask you to remove certain, in my opinion, inaccurate language in the block description (harassment is really strong language and considering the PII concerns here, it's also potentially libelous.) Thank you for your understanding and helping with this.2603:7000:9A40:949A:FC75:CE1A:E1A0:3869 (talk) 02:58, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Procedural decline, as the request was made by an anonymous editor. If this was you editing while logged out, please repeat the request while logged in. Sir Sputnik (talk) 21:00, 10 October 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).

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

Request reason:

unreasonable measure considering the context, harassment part unfounded at least

Decline reason:

This isn't sufficient. WP:GAB will explain how to craft an appropriate unblock request. You'll need to address your spamming, your use of another account, and more deeply address the harassment claim. Yamla (talk) 14:47, 22 September 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.

@Yamla: I admitted using my colleague's unpublished work as a source which was an issue. I thought the link between those two accounts were already clarified and it was a non-issue per se but there was a perception of cross-promoting sources I believe. I also admit giving hard criticism on the person accusing me because of the poor quality of the article I was editing. I regret not saying it in a nicer way but I was already upset by the motives behind the accusations (I didn't say anything personal but did question the motives behind the accusations). Happy to clarify on any of the above points. If you can't remove the block, I would at least kindly ask you to remove certain, in my opinion, inaccurate language in the block description (harassment is really strong language and considering the PII concerns here, it's also potentially libelous.) Thank you for your understanding and helping with this.

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).

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

Request reason:

Please review my previous request :) RoopeM (talk) 20:34, 4 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) 14:20, 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.