(Translated by https://www.hiragana.jp/)
User talk:UltioUltionis - Wikipedia Jump to content

User talk:UltioUltionis

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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).

UltioUltionis (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

I was block by someone because of sockpupetry. I dont know what I did wrong and I dont even know who blocked me. the name was not showing on the notice. if you will look through my edits you will definitely see that I did not do anything wrong and I edited pages in compliance with the wikipedia rules and always added Refrences to whatever edits I made.

Decline reason:

You were blocked by Husond (talk · contribs) as an obvious sockpuppet of the blocked vandal, Polscience (talk · contribs). — Yamla (talk) 18:05, 12 April 2008 (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).

UltioUltionis (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

Today I was blocked by user Husond for ellegedly being a sockpuppet of some user Polscience because as they argue, my edits were very similar to the ones of that user. As Husond mentioned on my talk page, he has a problem particalrly with my edits regarding transcontinental countries though he did not say what specifically he did not like. I have to tell you that my edits regarding transcontinental countries did not violate any wikipedia rule. I put there ONLY what could be proved and verified by the References and nothing else. I did not make things up .the data on those pages was Contradicting the information found on other pages such as the Europe page. I corrected articles. some of them were mentioning the same thing over and over in one paragraph confusing people such as the one on Georgia(country) page introduction, others did not provide any refrences or notes. if they wanted to leave it that way and let people get confused after seeng completely diffeent information from page to page, then I guess they dont want this encyclopedia to be a reliable sources of information that people will use wihout any fear of unreliable info. Husond said that they would check it in a checkuser.checkuser I believe can compare the edits of different editors but I dont know how will they prove this groundless and apocryphal accusation. they would not tell me something specific. what did I do wrong ? most of the editions were minor.did I put something there that could not be proved by the references ? NO.did I OMIT something without providing a reason ?NO. I dont know what happened but I know that this block is not fair.I might not be the most experienced wiki editor, but I know for sure that I did not do anything that would prompt anyone to block me.

Decline reason:


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.

Do you honestly want to go through a checkuser? After so many sockpuppets you should know by now that your editing pattern is well known and your sockpuppets are quite easy to detect. Making a series of good edits in order to mask that pattern is futile. Húsönd 17:41, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I dont know how is it possible to mask your edit. if you will go to my contributions everything is there just like in case of the rest of the editors. I did not and could not hide anything. I corrected articles. some of them were mentioning the same thing over and over in one paragraph confusing people and were illiterate, others did not provide any refrences or notes. checkuser I believe can compare the edits of different editors but I dont know how will they prove this groundless and apocryphal accusation. would someone tell me something specific???. what did I do wrong ? most of the editions were minor.did I put something there without adding the references ? did I OMIT something without providing a reason ? I dont know who blocked me, but I know that it is definateley a mistake. I believe I am not the only one who is being accused of different things in here as I hear many people complain as well.--UltioUltionis (talk) 17:56, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It was me who blocked you, for being a sockpuppet of User:Polscience and persisting with your edits regarding transcontinental countries for which you have been blocked countless times by both me and User:Alison following several checkusers. Húsönd 18:01, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I dont know who user polscience is and my edits regarding transcontinental countries do not violate any wikipedia rule. I put there ONLY what could be proved and verified by the references and nothing else. I did not make things up .the data on those pages was contraticting the information found on other pages such as the Europe page. if you wanted to leave it that way and let people get confused after seeng completely diffeent information from page to page, then I guess you dont want this encyclopedia to be a reliable sources of information that people will use wihout any fear of unreliable info. I am sorry to find out that it was you who blocked me and am I sorry that you blocked me for very unclear reasons. I might not be the most experienced wiki editor, but I know for sure that I did not do anything that would prompt anyone to block me.--UltioUltionis (talk) 18:10, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia from NanohaA'sYuri

[edit]

Hi, UltioUltionis. I welcome you to Wikipedia! Thank you for all of your edits. I hope you like editing here and being part of Wikipedia! Please sign your name on talk pages using four squiggles (~~~~); when you save the page, this will turn into your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or put {{helpme}} (and what you need help with) on your talk page and someone will show up very soon to answer your questions. Again, welcome! NanohaA'sYuriTalk, My master 23:49, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

You have been blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet of a banned or blocked user. As a blocked or banned user you are not entitled to edit Wikipedia. All of your edits have been reverted.

Details of how to appeal a block can be found at: Wikipedia:Appealing a block.