User talk:Nello.brunelli

Hello, I'm Ultimateuserxx. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Chiavari without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Ultimateuserxx (talk) 19:55, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Ultimateuserxx. I noticed that you recently removed some content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Ultimateuserxx (talk) 10:42, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. Ultimateuserxx (talk) 10:42, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. Ultimateuserxx (talk) 10:42, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia. Ultimateuserxx (talk) 10:42, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you remove or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Ultimateuserxx (talk) 10:42, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

March 2017[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistent vandalism. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Widr (talk) 10:45, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

{unblock|reason= Hi Wiki crew, how are you? I am really sorry to have been blocked. The main reason of it is because I didn't know how to manage Wiki and the talk page. From now I'll always explain my next editings, now that I know how to do it.

And now let me explain what happened: 1. I live in Chiavari, a little and beautiful town. I can see many problems in this place and I am always open and glad to talk about it. 3. In this town there isn't any waste issue and I don't understand how is possible to keep saying it. If you'll check the history page, you'll see that the content has been removed from other accounts, not only mine and it is always the same that put it back. 4. In none of the other languages of wikipedia/Chiavari is mentioned any waste issue. 5. I wonder how and when this content has been justified from the account that insist to publish. Does he/she have a valid mail? Anyway, as soon as you unblock me I will write the reason of my next editings. 6. Please, can I ask you to label as controversial that content? Or explain me how to do by myself?

Thank you in advance. Best Regards.

Nello

Nello.brunelli (talk) 20:54, 2 March 2017 (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).

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

Request reason:

Hi Wikipedia crew, how are you? I intend to appeal to your unblock request reject and the accuse of being a sock puppet. This is very frustrating and not fair. It seems to me that you're applying your policy without considering a piece of information.

Point 1: My account has been created at 27/07/2016. The mail is nello.brunelli@gmail.com. Nello is my first name and Brunelli my last name. My account is Nello.brunelli. I've donated money to Wikipedia, in 2015 and 2016 and I've got your thanks mail to nello.brunelli@gmail.com. Would you please check it out?

I am not a sock puppet, I didn’t create a fake account in order to bother people or spoil something or somebody.

Me and other accounts have tried to remove a very controversial paragraph from the page of my city where thirty thousand people live. I was so angry that I didn’t justify my removings, isn't it that my mistake? I apologize for that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chiavari&diff=768286176&oldid=768268408

If you will you can block me again in the future, but I don’t see the point of sentence that Nello.brunelli is a socket puppet, because there isn't any evidence of it.

Point 2: Right after my blocking a new account has been created "DrStrauss" that replaced back the content. It's a new account created just for that. That account might be a socket puppet, not me. Would please consider it? In the meantime that content is on line:

	https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chiavari&diff=768286261&oldid=768286176

I am very sad that somebody is bullying in the english page of my city.

Decline reason:

You'll need to explain to us the relationship between you and User:Ultimateuserxx, since you are edit warring against each other from the same IP. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇} 15:02, 5 March 2017 (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.

DrStrauss is hardly a single purpose account - they have been around for about four months and have edited a very wide variety of articles. Personally, I can see some point in the removals. One of the sources looks to be rather biased, and the whole issue looks to be not worse than similar issues raised in many other towns, and hardly worth including in an article. That is not excusing edit warring, however. Peridon (talk) 12:18, 5 March 2017 (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).

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

Request reason:

your reason here Sorry guys, this is first time i realize that you're supposing I might know mister/miss User:Ultimateuserxx. I haven't the pleasure. Do we have the same IP? Really? Maybe is because we live in the same street or in the same part of Chiavari? Some times people has the same IP address when live in the same building, I am almost scarred considering this scenario. I don’t know who is him/she is, completely. Actually I din't fought against User:Ultimateuserxx, I fought for the truth.

I have many friends in the States and in London. Sometimes I'd like to drop them the english Wikipedia page of my city but I can't because I fill so ashamed of that paragraph, which is not encyclopedic, it is not true, it is a kind of vandalic. It is not fear. All this just because User:Ultimateuserxx has a personal issue with the major or with Chiavari or whatever. Is this an encyclopedia or a little news paper where people blame and complain? I completely ignore who Ultimateuserxx

After many months I've got mad and I've started the warring in few hours. I know this is not and excuse, it was stupid and I apologies. I understand your block. Some rules and stuff are still confusing me as I am learning the Wikipedia community vibe, for example:

why the controversial paragraph has been restored by User:DrStrauss ? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chiavari&diff=768286261&oldid=768286176

I don't understand.

If you will unblock me, what am I suppose to do? Ignore the paragraph and loose? Can I at least set it as controversial? If not, can you do it? What can I do? Please advice me for the future. If you don’t unblock me now, is this going to be a life sentence, or something like few months?

Best Regards.

Nello Brunelli

Decline reason:

In the meantime, new sockpupeet has appeared (User:P1x77) and some IP edits were made (Special:Contributions/151.16.31.214). Please, explain this in your next unblock request. Vanjagenije (talk) 14:35, 27 March 2017 (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.

He/she says you're a co-worker. DrStrauss probably restored the paragraph because it's referenced. As I said above, I'm not too happy with one of the sources, but discussion is the correct way to deal with it. Peridon (talk) 18:06, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have missed Ultimateuserxx saying we're co worker, sorry for that. Well, so we're colleagues? This is shocking, but I really don't know who is he/she. I mean, I really can't immagine who this person might be. In my company there are 70 people working. Can we ask Ultimateuserxx to say his/her name?

Actually this is pretty unfair, he/she knows me, because I am using my real name Nello.brunelli, but I cant identify he/she. And this a sort of not fair. I not accusing somebody. I am just asking you to please considering this as well

Please sign talk page posts with ~~~~ to put your sig and the date stamp on. I don't advise publicising the identity of another editor who has not already identified themselves - see WP:OUTING. If they want to state who they are, that is up to them, but if you find out by accident, keep quiet about it. (I prefer anonymity myself, and recommend it to others. Bit too late here...) Peridon (talk) 19:29, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nello.brunelli (talk) 23:05, 5 March 2017 (UTC) well ... I agree. It wasn't my intention to reveal his/her name anyway. Nello.brunelli (talk) 23:05, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]