User talk:Mr.PingPotts
Mr.PingPotts (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
My account is not associated with anyone else’s on Wikipedia. Two different users attempted to make the same edit (which I noticed upon visiting the page), and for this reason I was blocked. Thousands of edits are made every single day, and edit history is viewable by all who visit the page. These edits were not made in secret conjunction or as a result of a connection. I made this edit and it was ultimately accepted and currently still stands. Mr. Daniel Rigal has taken it upon himself to operate based on assumptions. This is harmful to the Wikipedia community and should not be tolerated. Allow edits to take place if they are deemed appropriate by the community, and stop vilifying a dissenting opinion, Mr. Rigal. Mr.PingPotts (talk) 00:30, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Really obvious checkuser verified abuser of multiple accounts. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇 02:00, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
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.
Mr.PingPotts (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Verified how? What exactly did you find? Because I am an entirely different user. Do not state and assume that is account belongs to a verified abuser of multiple accounts, because that is not true. Give me more evidence that my block is justified, otherwise I will be contacting higher ups regarding this blatant abuse of Wikipedia community standards. Your assumptions are appalling. Mr.PingPotts (talk) 02:18, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
Decline reason:
As above, see WP:CHECKUSER. It involves system logs and technical details. Per the privacy policy the information used generally won't be released. Please keep in mind - if your next use of the {{unblock}} template isn't an unblock request, you may risk losing access to edit this page. SQLQuery me! 02:50, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
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.
Mr.PingPotts (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Are you viewing the IP address? I request to be unblocked because your statement that my account is that of a sockpuppet is incorrect. Please cite information regarding identical IP addresses and the ramifications of having one. I should not be blocked because my account is entirely my own, and my views are entirely my own. Again, this is a request to be unblocked. If you review my edit history you’ll see that I’ve made marginal edits that are not vandalism or harassing. And again, my IP address does not indicate my use of multiple accounts. Please consider the fact that this evidence is not useful in determining whether or not this account is that of a sockpuppet. Please do not block me just because you see there are identical IP addresses unless you can cite a specific rule regarding that. I appreciate your time and effort to resolve this. Mr.PingPotts (talk) 03:08, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
Decline reason:
As warned, you've now lost talk page access. Yamla (talk) 11:50, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
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.
Sockpuppet investigation
[edit]
An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Germaine58, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.
DanielRigal (talk) 22:36, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
Different user from Germaine58
[edit]This is not a duplicate account. I am a different user and person entirely. Whoever opened an investigation and tied me into it is completely and utterly off the mark. Please feel free to look into my status as a user. I am open to all investigations. Mr.PingPotts (talk) 22:54, 11 August 2018 (UTC)