User talk:Serverobserver1

February 2024

Hello, I'm Fanfanboy. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to CGMagazine have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Fanfanboy (talk) 19:48, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the feedback, I am still learning to use Wikipedia, but want to ensure everything I do is helpful! If you ever have more advice, I am eager to learn more. Serverobserver1 (talk) 20:09, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sockpuppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:06, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Serverobserver1 (talk) 16:50, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Serverobserver1 (talk) 16:54, 27 February 2024 (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).

Serverobserver1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am not sure what a sock puppet is, but I was just made my account yesterday and was adding details that seemed missing and trying to answer the notice on the page. I agree with the notes made on the page, much of what was written there seemed useless to the average reader, although some could be useful. Wikipedia is not a place for marketing, so anyone that does that should have those edits removed, or adjusted to take only the facts with no spin. Please let me know if the edits I made where wrong or were not in the interests of the Wikipedia reading audience, I want to make sure I follow the rules and am a valuable member of the community. Thanks for reviewing so I can do better on the platform. Thanks for reviewing Serverobserver1 (talk) 15:30, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

WP:SOCK, which you've already been pointed to, explains sockpuppetry. Yamla (talk) 15:39, 27 February 2024 (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).

Serverobserver1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

After reading the section on sock puppets, I can assure you I am am not. This is the first time signing up to the platform, even though I have been a reader for years. I simply was. Trying to address the notice on the page and make edits that would be useful to the readers of Wikipedia, and tried to make sure any edits followed the guidelines of the platform. Thanks for reviewing Serverobserver1 (talk) 17:01, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I suspect you are more of a meat puppet than a sock puppet, so I think that the block is correctly preventing you from editing. 331dot (talk) 11:31, 28 February 2024 (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).

Serverobserver1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

reading the description of meat puppet, I also am not. I have no association, and in fact, to my knowledge, I don't have any friends with Wikipedia accounts. I respect the teams of volunteers who take their time here, but I am not sure why I would be flagged as such. This has not been a great experience so far, with being flagged out of the gate, but I understand on sites like Wikipedia it needs to be monitored for bad actors, if there is a way to verify my identity, I would be happy too, since as I mentioned before, I believe in the platform, and only want to see it do well. Thanks for your time, and despite my frustrations , I do understand why the people working as volunteers are so critical and can't just take people at face value. Serverobserver1 (talk)

Decline reason:

I'm sure you mean all this, but it doesn't add anything to your earlier requests, and really there is no way for us to credibly verify your identity. — Daniel Case (talk) 06:17, 18 March 2024 (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.