User talk:Woshiyiweizhongguoren

Welcome!

Hello, Woshiyiweizhongguoren, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

• Introduction and Getting started
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or , and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome!--Biografer (talk) 19:11, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Because you thanked me

Woshiyiweizhongguoren, you thanked me for one of my recent edits, so here is a heart-felt...  YOU'RE WELCOME! It's a pleasure, and I hope you have a lot of fun while you edit this inspiring encyclopedia phenomenon! User:Anonymuss User (talk)

20:53, 11 April 2019 (UTC) ᴀɴᴏɴʏᴍᴜᴤᴤ ᴜᴤᴇʀ (ᴛᴀʟᴋ) 20:02, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

April 2019

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for Not here behaviour, obvious sock who is trolling us.

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 ~~~~}}.  TonyBallioni (talk) 14:18, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

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).

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

---

Request reason:

Not here behavior? I am here to build the encyclopedia, having created useful articles including Xiamen Bridge, Louwailou, and Aiwowo. I don't know exactly what you mean by "obvious sock who is trolling us", but this is my first and only account. Perhaps you meant to block somebody else? Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 14:27, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Decline reason:

In my opinion, based on your edits and behaviour, there is no doubt whastoever that this is a sock account intent on trolling and playing "catch me if you can". I knew a block would be forthcoming as the red flags practically litter the playing field at this point, I just wasn't certain as to whether you'd be tied to the master account prior to outwearing your welcome.Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 16:06, 11 April 2019 (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.

@TonyBallioni: I'm really confused. Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 14:30, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

• No, there is no mistake. This block was intentional on your first day you told us you were waiting to get autoconfirmed to publish an article, before asking something you clearly knew the answer to. This edit summary was nothing more than trolling us, as is this (I'm aware it's a humour page, but it contributes to a trend.) There is more, but I'm not going to overwhelm this page with diffs.
  You're basically daring us to try to figure out what your previous account was. It doesn't matter who you were before, you are an obvious sock who is taunting us to try to identify a master. We don't play those games. TonyBallioni (talk) 14:38, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

@TonyBallioni: When asking Huon about the auto confirmed rights, I was just making sure that what I was thinking was accurate, to clear away any possible misconceptions. I don't get how the SPI and last topic pool diffs support the fact that I'm deceiving anybody. Never once have I ever implied the existence of prior accounts. Quite the opposite, in fact. I do not have the slightest intention to harm the encyclopedia, and in fact I try to prevent disruption by patrolling recent changes and random pages. Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 15:18, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

I’m aware you claim to be an IP who registered. I don’t believe you. TonyBallioni (talk) 15:24, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Opinions from others? Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 15:30, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Admin help requests are not needed in this case, that's what the unblock template is for. People are getting very tired of this game.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 16:02, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

I read your claims on my talk page, but they are unconvincing. I endorse this block. —DoRD (talk)​ 16:04, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

@Ponyo: OK, I'll stop using admin help. I'm not trying to play games to fool the administrators, by the way.

@TonyBallioni: On recent changes I see non-auto confirmed users "create" articles in their sandboxes or user pages. Does that make them socks? Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 16:06, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

WP:DBQ Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 16:06, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

That's it

Since nobody seems to agree that I'm welcome in this community anymore, goodbye. Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 16:07, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

PS the original owner gave his account to me, I can do whatever I want with it. :DWoshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 19:54, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

And with that, you've admitted to account compromise. I'll be requesting a lock at meta. TonyBallioni (talk) 19:55, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

I don't care

• This user, on their 14th day of account creation, was able to ask a question at a recent RfA [1] and even !vote in Support for the candidate [2]?
  There should be stronger minimum requirements to !vote at an RfA? Britishfinance (talk) 22:15, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

  @Britishfinance: I may not like the result sometimes, but the whole "consensus is important, number of votes is theoretically irrelevant" idea on enwiki (contrary, for example, to dewiki, where a vote is very strictly a vote) eliminates the need for such requirements. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 12:48, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

  @ToBeFree: I am in agreement on that and my understanding is that en-WP has never been about "hard" rules but always involved a degree of "consensus" around rules (e.g. why AfD is not run by a bot). However, my point here is why do we allow a 14-day old account register a !vote in what is a major community gathering that requires a material understanding of WP to register a useful opinion to help build a consensus. On one hand, we have bureaucrats talking about downgrading !votes of experienced editors for various reasons, however, this character just seems to have slipped in with nobody noticing anything about them? We should require a minimum threshold of experience to participate in RfAs. Britishfinance (talk) 13:01, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

May I suggest this conversation take place literally anywhere but a globally locked LTA's talk page?Praxidicae (talk) 13:09, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

A page you started (Aiwowo) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Aiwowo.

User:Newslinger while reveiwing this page as a part of our page curation process had the following comments:

Thanks for contributing this article to Wikipedia! When you get a chance, please add some more reliable sources to the article since the Cardiff Confucius Institute link doesn't seem to work.

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Newslinger}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

— Newslinger talk 05:46, 12 July 2019 (UTC)