Aldaz321
Aldaz321, you are invited to the Teahouse!
edit
|
Hi Aldaz321! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. We hope to see you there!
Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:02, 22 May 2018 (UTC) |
Aldaz321 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I am not affiliated with Donnie Juanito. If I used a similar IP address, it is because I live in China (Internet censorship in China) and a Virtual private network is necessary at times to use the site. If there is anything else needed please let me know as I am a new contributor. Thanks, Aldaz321 (talk) 04:20, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
Decline reason:
The match isn't just based on a similar IP address. Yamla (talk) 10:34, 30 May 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.
Aldaz321 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Can I know what other criteria it is based? Or how I can prove that I am not this person? Or how to proceed? On the Help:I have been blocked page it says, "If instructions are given in the block message, follow the instructions." If it's reason #3 (match an IP address used by a blocked account), how do I get and administrator's assistance Yamla (talk) Thanks
Decline reason:
This is a CheckUser block, so it cannot be lifted without the consent of a CheckUser. As Bbb23 has not responded here, I think it's fair to say that he stands behind his block. Because of this, and because of the potential for private information discussed by Yamla, your best option for appeals at this point is to email the Arbitration Committee at arbcom-l
lists.wikimedia.org. TonyBallioni (talk) 23:09, 31 May 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.
You sent me an email, but there's nothing confidential there. Unfortunately, the technical information that ties you to the sockmaster account is confidential (and I don't have access to it anyway). WP:CHECKUSER gives a bit more detail. --Yamla (talk) 12:42, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
Note that off-wiki evidence, which of course I won't share here (unless you tell me to) so as to avoid WP:OUTING, shows that you are part of a marketing team. It's therefore likely that the other accounts were created by others in your marketing team. That also points to violations of WP:COI, WP:PAID, and WP:PROMO. --Yamla (talk) 12:44, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
I emailed you to make sure I was able to get a hold of you because I'm not sure how the notification system works. So only the WP:CHECKUSER has this technical information and there is no way that I can prove I'm not related to these other accounts?
As for the off-wiki evidence, you're already "outing me". I don't mind, however multiple accounts being created from other colleagues doesn't seem possible due to a language barrier. I can be more detailed via a private email/message if needed. You can be as open as you'd feel necessary, however you can see that I am a real person and if you review my edits they are objective.
In terms of the violation, I can only see a WP:COI. I am not getting paid directly to do this job, however I can see how these 3 items can be an issue. In the section of WP:PAID it states that, "employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which they receive, or expect to receive, compensation". I have yet to make any major changes other than updating incorrect information on another company using dated information that conflicts with my current employer. Being new to Wikipedia I would still have to agree and would be happy to make any of the necessary change listed on that section:
a statement on your user page, a statement on the talk page accompanying any paid contributions, or a statement in the edit summary accompanying any paid contributions." [1]
To your last point, I have done no promoting or advertising whatsoever. I write content often and have read Wikipedia's guidelines on creating a page. From my understanding, even after being written, it will still need to be reviewed by a WP:CHECKUSER. So, please let me know some follow-up activity.
Thanks again
- There's nothing more I can do for you. You have an open unblock request and another admin will be along shortly to review it. --Yamla (talk) 11:30, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the follow-up Yamla (talk), but I really wish you were a little more detailed on who you think I am. However, I am starting to understand that a level of anonymity is appreciated on this site. Anyhow, I will use the recommended channel from the admin's response. Thanks again Aldaz321 (talk) 05:15, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
Help
edit{{help me}}
Please help me with... proving I am not a sockpuppet (would outing myself help)? Also, I realized that I can request articles on business people/companies. Can someone help me with this, as I can't make any edits whatsoever.
Thanks Aldaz321 (talk) 04:30, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
Aldaz321 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Hi, my account is still blocked and I have received no response from Bbb23 (talk). I have also sent an email (within Wikipedia) to arbitration. My first question is, should I wait longer for a response? My second question is, have I sent my request to arbitration properly (should I just use my personal email)? My last question is one I've continued to ask, but have yet to get any real answer to. Would outing myself solve this socket puppet problem? Any feedback on these questions would be greatly appreciated. I understand that User:Bbb23 stands by his block, but I do need further clarity and so far this has been the only way to get a response. I'd appreciate the help and thanks for your time Aldaz321 (talk) 03:15, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
Decline reason:
If you have emailed the ArbComs you should await there response.-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 05:14, 11 June 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.
August 2018
edit Aldaz321 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Hi, I would like to update the situation first before addressing the block that is still on my account. I have emailed arbitration (June 29th) and received an auto-reply acknowledging my request. Not having heard back, I've read more and will try following the steps listed on Wiki's guide to appealing blocks. Addressing the block: The block is not necessary as I haven't caused any damage as a Wikipedia user. I understand why I was blocked, however there are no real ways to prove that you are not a sockpuppet user (unless you meet a few other Wikipedia users in person, which is difficult in China). I also use a VPN (which allows me to access Wikipedia) most of the time so I will almost always be using the same IP address as others. I have figured out that I don't need a VPN when accessing Wikipedia via direct link, but I don't know how helpful that is in this case. Why I'm requesting the unblock: I would like to request a Wikipedia Article [2]. Being seen as an none objective source, this will prevent any potential violations or mistakes that can be made. There are also some outdated information regarding this page (TAL International Group),[3] which I had spent time editing in the past (I have no affiliation and the information regarding there merger to Triton International is well documented). Lastly, I don't want to be affiliated with the DQ confirmed sockpuppet account category. If I am to remain blocked, I ask that you please remove me from this category and can keep the block on my account if it is felt it is still necessary. "Before requesting to be unblocked, you can ask the administrators that blocked you any clarification about their actions, and they're expected to answer them, though first you have to read the policies they have linked as the reason for the block." [4] WP:ADMINACCT I have yet to receive any type of response from Bbb23 and I look forward to your feedback. Thank you. @Bbb23: Aldaz321 (talk) 05:17, 30 August 2018 (UTC) User:Aldaz321
Decline reason:
As this is a CheckUser block, regular admins cannot remove it. If what Huon says below is also true, the best place for your appeal is the arbitration committee as they consider appeals from CheckUser blocks and can consider private information which most administrators cannot. You can contact them by using Special:EmailUser/Arbitration Committee or emailing directly at arbcom-l lists.wikimedia.org TonyBallioni (talk) 22:56, 14 September 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.
- I have spoken with Aldaz321 on the unblock IRC channel, and to me it seems plausible that they are not part of a "team" that markets multiple companies. They have a conflict of interest regarding their contributions here but seem willing to deal with it via WP:RA, which would be the recommended practice. Part of what I found and what they said would run afoul of WP:OUTING if published here; I can provide some details via email if desired. Huon (talk) 08:34, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
Aldaz321 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
To whom it may concern, I have been awaiting a reply again from the arbitration committee. This is the email I had sent regarding my block on April 1st, 2019. It has almost been a year now and I was wondering if I can get some sort of reply or update as it is very hard to even attempt to contact users via Wikipedia communication features for help. Please read the copy of the most recent email sent below: Hi, It has been a bit longer than 6 months now and I would like to have my account reviewed once again. Prior to doing so however, I would like to know if there is any procedures I should be adhering to. Before receiving the English Arbitration Committee's response, I was able to speak to a wiki user (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Huon) via Wikipedia's live help channel. Huon can provide further details and I'd be more than happy to as well, if you'd be will to help me with further instruction. In reply to some of your concerns, I am now doing this on my free-time and not during working hours (so paid editing is no longer an issue). Secondly, the continued editing of TAL International Group will be addressed via a content dispute. If this is one of the main concerns, I won't touch the page. The information on that page is dated and my reasoning behind editing that page was to gain editing points to my account. This is an area I knew was wrong so I figured it would be simple. I would like to regain access because from what I've read, you're only allowed one account. That account is also incorrectly labeled a sock puppet and I am not even able to edit on even someone's talk page. Ignorance is no excuse however, I would ask for at least the label to change (sock puppet is incorrect). An indefinite ban of course would mean I am not able to request an article be written ever (like Wikipedia recommends in the event of conflicts of interest). Lastly, I'm not sure if this counts as a submission but I would like further feedback and have no problems with Huon outing me in case you'd like to ask her any further questions.
Decline reason:
Procedural decline as it is up to ArbCom. Dlohcierekim (talk) 23:00, 24 July 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.
- I have consulted GorillaWarfare, a member of the arbitration committee, and she says that she can't see any sign of a message from you after your first appeal was rejected, so probably something went wrong with sending your email. You may like to try again.
- You must be finding this quite frustrating, taking so long to get responses to your appeals, and I am impressed by how patiently you seem to be dealing with it. Most people would either have given up long ago, or else got angry about it.
- @Huon and Yamla: You both have had access to information that is not visible to me, and you have come to different conclusions about whether this editor is part of a marketing team. Is there any point in suggesting you discuss the matter with a view to trying to settle that question? I can think of several reasons why you might not wish to, including the fact that you may not wish to return to a matter that you moved on from a fairly long time ago (in Yamla's case over a year ago) and that you don't remember anything about, but I just thought I would raise the question in case you might be willing to consider it. JamesBWatson (talk) 21:59, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Hey @JamesBWatson: thank you for your earnest response. It has been difficult, but I've learned that it's just best to follow the rules and I don't want to make the same mistakes again. Apologies for the late response, as I typically only follow up on this once a month. I have sent a new email to the arbitration committee today and will await their response. If you or someone at the committee can confirm my email has been received, it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks again
Aldaz321 (talk) 07:00, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
- In a message above, where I said that something seemed to have gone wrong with your email to the arbitration committee, I said that you might like to try again. Have you done that? If you haven't then I suggest you do so now. If you have already done that, and still not received any response from the committee, let me know, and I will follow it up. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:59, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
Hey again @JamesBWatson: I resent a new email immediately after responding to your message on July 18th. The email was sent to both arbcom-en@wikimedia.org and arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org with the subject "Appeals of blocks or bans directly related to Arbitration Committee decision Fwd: [arbcom-l] UnBlock Request Jun 1, 2018". Thanks again and let me know if there's anything I can fix or do. I will check my notifications more frequently. Best Aldaz321 (talk)
July 2019-- in Limbo
editHey, @JamesBWatson: Catholicism may have eliminated Limbo, (or so I heard) but we still have it here. Any way forward? 13 months! Dlohcierekim (talk) 17:52, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
- Today I have received an email from you about this, in which you very politely and patiently asked if I could try to get any progress on this (frankly, much more patiently than I would have done under the circumstances). It is possible that there is some persistent problem preventing your emails from reaching the arbitration committee (but evidently not preventing you from emailing me) otherwise I find it difficult to understand how there can still have been no response by now. However, whatever the cause of the problem, the 13 months mentioned by Dlohcierekim have now become close to 15 months, and we really need to bring your waiting to an end.
- I have now emailed the arbitration committee myself, asking them if they can at last settle the matter one way or another. I hope that they can do so, but if you have heard nothing back from them after a while (perhaps a month) then please ping me again. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:54, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
- I have received a reply from a member of the arbitration committee, telling me that they have received a number of emails from you including two "recent ones" (whatever that means) but that they have a large backlog and haven't had time to deal with it yet. I'm afraid it looks as though you will have to wait a long time, and there is no indication how long that is likely to be. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:31, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
Hey @JamesBWatson: I appreciate all the help. I guess there's not much else to do but to wait at this point. I'll just keep checking in monthly, and try to follow the rules to avoid any other negative repercussions. Hopefully this matter will be resolved by 2020. Thanks again Aldaz321 (talk) 08:47, 24 September 2019 (UTC)