August 2019Edit

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
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 ~~~~}}.  Bbb23 (talk) 21:31, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 
This blocked 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). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

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


Request reason:

Dear user Bbb23, thank you for your notification. I was not aware that it was mandatory and not optional to disclose usage of alternative accounts, which ultimately caused a serious misunderstanding. To clarify, the edits I made with this (my primary) account were not deemed controversial by my peers and were thankfully kept; rather, it was the edits made with my newly opened secondary account (Xyvania) which caused (in my view) an overreaction on certain users' end, while the edits made on my third account had nothing to do with the edits made via the former two. I state earnestly that none of the edits I have made or intend to make (on any account) are disruptive in nature. That's not what I'm here for. I chose to operate alternative accounts so as to focus on different subject matters and do not have malicious intents doing so (otherwise that would make me no different than real disruptive users and vandals damaging the website's content). I believe taking a good look at my recent edits should make that clear, and invite you to do so. Though I believe a simple warning would've been enough, I've come to understand the grounds on which a block has been instated. My intention is to contribute to the project in any way I can, no matter how challenging it can get; if I'll "mess up" for a legitimate reason, it'll show. I'm ready and willing to talk through any sort of misunderstanding/disagreement on any user's part via constructive dialogue. I ask you to please conditionally lift the block instated on my primary account; should the blocks be lifted from other accounts, their status will be labelled appropriately. I sincerely hope for your understanding. Thank you! Trxch (talk) 18:20, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only. This unblock request has been open for more than two weeks but has not proven sufficient for any reviewing administrator to take action. You are welcome to request a new block review if you substantially reword your request. Yamla (talk) 12:34, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
 
This blocked 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). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

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


Request reason:

Dear user Yamla, thank you for your comment. I believe that my request is worded properly, and anything I may potentially add will essentially reinforce the points made earlier. Since the block was instated by Bbb23, I think it's best for him to reply to the request (however, his records show that the number of users he blocked far outnumbers the number of those he unblocked, so I'm not sure if he's even going to take the time to review this request, let alone if he'll be fine with unblocking). In any case (since I am currently unable to do so), I believe contacting him would be great and he could get back to the request. Alternatively, an involvement by another competent user/admin would also be appreciated. Thank you in advance! Trxch (talk) 23:23, 12 October 2019 (UTC) Trxch (talk) 23:30, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only. This unblock request has been open for more than two weeks but has not proven sufficient for any reviewing administrator to take action. You are welcome to request a new block review if you substantially reword your request. Yamla (talk) 20:26, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
 
This blocked 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). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

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


Request reason:

To whom it may concern, A while ago my account was blocked on grounds of "abusing multiple accounts". All things considered, I will refrain from using multiple accounts for the time being. Should I ever use secondary accounts again, I will not be using them without having them labelled as alternate accounts of my main account (this one). In any case, I will not use my account for making edits going against the encyclopedia's principles. I will try as I have before to talk things through, get along and cooperate with other users and provide sources to my edits, at all times. I am more than ready and willing to move past the discomfiting situation at hand, and ask any reviewing administrator to take appropriate measures. I hope for your understanding and thank you in advance. Trxch (talk) 02:31, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Decline reason:

I'm sorry, but I cannot unblock you at this time. That you do not understand the problematic nature of your edits with the other account is troubling. Also, there is the matter of lost trust. Having edited in this manner has given you the appearance of untrustworthiness. You should consider not editing at all, with any account or IP, for 6 months. I would think it wise to set a topic ban on Azerbaijanis and Origin of the Azerbaijanis once you are unblocked. As always, any other admin may modify or ignore these conditions if they feel some other action/conditions are warranted. I see this is a checkuser block. Please read the pertinent section of the GAB-- Deepfriedokra 05:33, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
 
This blocked 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). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

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


Request reason:

Dear user Deepfriedokra, First of all, thank you very much for your prompt response. Secondly, I wonder what makes you believe that I do not understand, as you wrote, the "problematic nature" of the edits. Not to come off defensive, but the fact that the edits were made by two accounts was virtually the only thing wrong about them. The actual content of my edits (on either account) wasn't, as it did not go against the website's rules and the response they prompted (prior to the block) was a revert and a suggestion to discuss introducing these changes in the Talk Pages of the respective articles. If the edits had been made by this account alone, none of this would've happened. Like I mentioned previously, I invite administrators to take a proper look at my edits and see for themselves. I had no problems whatsoever when I edited with this account; it was when I switched to editing with my new second account that the same users who had previously had no issues with my edits came forward and reverted them, partly because of them having been made by a "new user". TL;DR: I understand that it may be hard to take someone for their word, yet I hope that you can come around and see things my way. You can "keep an eye on me" if you wish/need to, I'm fine with that. Heck, if need be, you can block me again, it wouldn't take much to do that. And on a sidenote, it has in fact been close to 5 months since the block, so that'd sort of fulfil your suggestion. Please let me know what you think. Thank you.Trxch (talk) 00:46, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only. This unblock request has been open for more than two weeks but has not proven sufficient for any reviewing administrator to take action. You are welcome to request a new block review if you substantially reword your request. Yamla (talk) 14:44, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 
This blocked 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). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

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


Request reason:

To whom it may concern,

I'll keep it short and won't repeat myself. I'm puzzled as to how long it has taken for any administrator to review my requests properly - so far, only two have replied, with one simply issuing "procedural declines".

I ask for my case to be evaluated properly and measures to be taken accordingly, hoping for the removal of the indefinite block. Please refer to the previous request on my user talk page. Thank you in advance. Trxch (talk) 10:05, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only. This unblock request has been open for more than two weeks but has not proven sufficient for any reviewing administrator to take action. You are welcome to request a new block review if you substantially reword your request. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 09:17, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

UNblock discussionEdit

This is a check user block, so only a check user can unblock. {{checkuser needed}}. Will proceed pending their feedback. --Deep fried okra User talk:Deepfriedokra 13:36, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

There were previous concerns raised on your talk page that have been archived. If a check user consents to proceeding, you will need to address these issues before you can be unblocked. You were previously blocked for WP:edit warring. Your response to the concerns over edit warring were less than promising. Please read User:Deepfriedokra/ew for some coaching on how to proceed with that concern. Please see See WP:BRD and relate it to how you would proceed if unblocked. It's been more than 6 months since your last request, so hopefully we can move forward. --Deep fried okra User talk:Deepfriedokra 13:49, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

There is no socking immediately visible but also quite limited data. @Bbb23: Do you have any comments? Best, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 16:11, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
  • Disabled the template so it disappears from SPI. --qedk (t c) 14:17, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
    @Deepfriedokra: There is no apparent socking and the blocking CU hasn't responded to a ping so I'll give my consent as a CheckUser for you to proceed with this unblock request as a normal appeal. Best, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 03:20, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Still awaiting response for edit warring and understanding of WP:BRD. Any admin can decline accept without concern for my toes. --Deep fried okra User talk:Deepfriedokra 03:27, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

unblock discussionEdit

You still have not addressed the concerns that led to your block and are complaining about it taking too long to properly consider unblocking you. We are not customer service, and this is not a venue servicing your needs. Please address the concerns that led to your block. --Deep fried okra (schalte ein) 08:01, 14 June 2020 (UTC)