User talk:THEREALPAULSTINGER

November 2022

Blocked as a sockpuppet

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:RobertChristain22 per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/RobertChristain22. 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 ~~~~}}. Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 10:09, 5 November 2022 (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).

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

Request reason:

I am not a sockpuppet of RobertChristain22 or Digicon8. The reason I was looking at the Propublica page was for a school project on how to use wikipedia wisely for research, and saw in the view history section that the page had been vandalized before. I created an account and restored one of the vandalized versions because I thought it was funny, and thought nothing would come of it. I now know that that there are repercussions for vandalizing. I regret doing this and will not do it again. I intend to help improve Wikipedia pages, like I have done for the Rutles page. THEREALPAULSTINGER (talk)

Decline reason:

Given the findings at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/RobertChristain22/Archive and your ill-advised vandalism, I see nothing wrong with the block. Now you know there are consequences for your actions. Yamla (talk) 21:59, 5 November 2022 (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).

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

Request reason:

I think I should be given a second chance. You can see in the "View history" section of the Rutles Wikipedia page I have and intend to improve Wikipedia articles. My work on the Rutles page was reverted because I became blocked. I will not vandalize again. THEREALPAULSTINGER (talk) 22:15, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Your second chance is the standard offer. 331dot (talk) 08:14, 6 November 2022 (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.

(Non-administrator comment) You'll get blocked from this page if you make too many unblock requests (but you probably know that already). Take the standard offer. ~~ lol1 VNIO (I made a mistake? talk to me) 22:23, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]