User talk:HarvardJock
Add topicBlocked as a sockpuppet
[edit]
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 why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice:
{{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.
HarvardJock (block log ⢠active blocks ⢠global blocks ⢠contribs ⢠deleted contribs ⢠filter log ⢠creation log ⢠change block settings ⢠unblock ⢠checkuser (log) ⢠SI)
Request reason:
Hi, please consider this my appeal of a block that completely came out of left field. Per WP:GAB, I will be taking the third approach: that my conduct is not connected in any way with the block.
Simply put, I have absolutely no connection to the accounts listed in the sockpuppet investigations. The reporter HistoryofIran has taken a few overlaps in my editing history of thousands of edits across massive numbers of articles and used that to conflate a connection between myself and two others with similar usernames: OxfordianKing and YaleianKing. I am not the same user as these two accounts. I recall seeing one of them make edits back in the day to a couple similar topics as me and found it strange - I'm not sure if they were joking or trolling me because of my username but I didn't even know or see that they got banned until now. Regarding topic overlaps, please look through my edit history where I've edited hundreds (or more) articles related to Iran: Giv, Markazi, Germany-Iran relations, and SUMKA are only a few drops in the bucket, as I've also edited other articles related to modern Iranian history (e.g., Nation Party of Iran, Aria Party, Anglo-Soviet invasion of Iran, and many, many more). So, how are a few behavioral overlaps sufficient for a block? Furthermore, this case seems to have been merged with another pair involving users like Confluencerist, Lordser8000 all of whom I have absolutely no relation to. I don't know who these people are, why I got merged in with them, and how there is a "strong technical connection" with them, per the investigation. My ISP has CGNAT enabled, by the way, so it's possible these accounts got mixed in because of CGNAT. I've provided proof of this on the Unblock Ticket Request System. I have very good standing on the Wikipedia community and am nothing but a net positive, so please take this defense into consideration, as I am truly innocent. Thank you for your time. HarvardJockđŤ (talk) 21:24, 2 June 2026 (UTC)
Decline reason:
This account is run by the same person as OxfordianKing. A study of the editing histories of the accounts leaves no room for doubt. JBW (talk) 08:36, 5 June 2026 (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.