Revision as of 23:57, 15 July 2008 editWill Beback (talk | contribs)112,162 edits not stopping anyone← Previous edit | Revision as of 23:59, 15 July 2008 edit undoSepho (talk | contribs)13 edits per Misplaced Pages:SOCK#Alternative_account_notification - ArbCom informedNext edit → | ||
Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
: Given that you are involved in that dispute, it would be more sensible if you allow an uninvolved administrator to review the unblock request. I have contacted the ArbCom in this regard. ] (]) 23:48, 15 July 2008 (UTC) | : Given that you are involved in that dispute, it would be more sensible if you allow an uninvolved administrator to review the unblock request. I have contacted the ArbCom in this regard. ] (]) 23:48, 15 July 2008 (UTC) | ||
*I'm not preventing any admin from reviewing the block. You're probably right that ArbCom members are in the best position to make a determination of what's proper in this case. ]] ] 23:57, 15 July 2008 (UTC) | *I'm not preventing any admin from reviewing the block. You're probably right that ArbCom members are in the best position to make a determination of what's proper in this case. ]] ] 23:57, 15 July 2008 (UTC) | ||
::As I have stated, I have no ill intentions. I have declared my main account to an ArbCom member, as per ]. ] (]) 23:59, 15 July 2008 (UTC) |
Revision as of 23:59, 15 July 2008
Hey there. I have blocked you indefinitely as a single purpose sock. If you object to this, do not hesitate to drop me a line to ask for a rethink on the puppetmaster account. Thanks. weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 21:47, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
This user is asking that their block be reviewed:
Sepho (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Per WP:SOCK#LEGIT, this is an alternate account of an existing WP user:- A user making substantial contributions to an area of interest in Misplaced Pages might register another account to be used solely in connection with developing that area.
- A person editing an article which is highly controversial within his/her family, social or professional circle, and whose Misplaced Pages identity is known within that circle, or traceable to their real-world identity, may wish to use an alternative account in order to avoid real-world consequences from their involvement in that area.
Notes:
- In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
- Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.
If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:
{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2= Per ], this is an alternate account of an existing WP user: * A user making substantial contributions to an area of interest in Misplaced Pages might register another account to be used solely in connection with developing that area. * A person editing an article which is highly controversial within his/her family, social or professional circle, and whose Misplaced Pages identity is known within that circle, or traceable to their real-world identity, may wish to use an alternative account in order to avoid real-world consequences from their involvement in that area. ] (]) 22:50, 15 July 2008 (UTC) |3 = ~~~~}}
If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}}
with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.
{{unblock reviewed |1= Per ], this is an alternate account of an existing WP user: * A user making substantial contributions to an area of interest in Misplaced Pages might register another account to be used solely in connection with developing that area. * A person editing an article which is highly controversial within his/her family, social or professional circle, and whose Misplaced Pages identity is known within that circle, or traceable to their real-world identity, may wish to use an alternative account in order to avoid real-world consequences from their involvement in that area. ] (]) 22:50, 15 July 2008 (UTC) |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}
If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here
with your rationale:
{{unblock reviewed |1= Per ], this is an alternate account of an existing WP user: * A user making substantial contributions to an area of interest in Misplaced Pages might register another account to be used solely in connection with developing that area. * A person editing an article which is highly controversial within his/her family, social or professional circle, and whose Misplaced Pages identity is known within that circle, or traceable to their real-world identity, may wish to use an alternative account in order to avoid real-world consequences from their involvement in that area. ] (]) 22:50, 15 July 2008 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}
- It's hard for me to see why adding entries to a bibliogrpahy should be so controversial as to require a sockpuppet. A concern with this topic is that the ArbCom has placed it on probation, making the use of sockpuppets problematic. All that said, if the user gives an assurance that his or her main doesn't currently edit any other articles in the topic then the sock account seems harmless. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 23:03, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
I have personal reasons why to hide my identity, and the use of a legit SP account is designed for this specific purpose. Of course, I will not use this account for any disruption. Sepho (talk) 23:17, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
- Have you been involvd in editing any articles related to the topic of Prem Rawat in the last few months? ·:· Will Beback ·:· 23:21, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
- If I answer your question, the whole purpose of this legitimate use of an SP account will be worthless. Sepho (talk) 23:38, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
- The article is under probation per the ArbCom. If you cannot give an assurance that your sock puppet isn't being used to edit articles in the same topic as your main account then there is a reasonable concern that it is not legitimate. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 23:45, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
- Given that you are involved in that dispute, it would be more sensible if you allow an uninvolved administrator to review the unblock request. I have contacted the ArbCom in this regard. Sepho (talk) 23:48, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
- I'm not preventing any admin from reviewing the block. You're probably right that ArbCom members are in the best position to make a determination of what's proper in this case. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 23:57, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
- As I have stated, I have no ill intentions. I have declared my main account to an ArbCom member, as per Misplaced Pages:SOCK#Alternative_account_notification. Sepho (talk) 23:59, 15 July 2008 (UTC)