Invisibelibrarian
Invisibelibrarian, you are invited to the Teahouse!
edit
|
Hi Invisibelibrarian! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. We hope to see you there!
Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:04, 10 March 2019 (UTC) |
April 2020
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.
— Berean Hunter (talk) 04:06, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
@Berean Hunter and Ivanvector:
Invisibelibrarian (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Can i know the issue why i was blocked with out no proper reason mentioned and saying its from technical logs and i already mentioned that my account is not associated with any socket puppet but they still eager to block my account. Invisibelibrarian (talk) 04:19, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
Decline reason:
If you are part of a party's IT team, then this is undeclared paid editing. If you are tag-teaming with your colleagues in that team, then that's also sockpuppetry. See WP:COWORKER: We cannot tell whether there's one person operating these accounts that are technically indistinguishable or several, and it makes no difference to Wikipedia; we treat them as one. It's also decidedly untrue that you only uploaded one audio file; removing the warnings doesn't mean it didn't happen. Huon (talk) 14:58, 26 April 2020 (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.
Confirmed to:
- Wikibotme (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- Checkbotin (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- Wikicheckmate (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- Jimmyreditfine (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
You didn't tell the truth when you said that you have only one account here. Those accounts have been active over at Commons where I believe that you aren't telling the truth either. This file is property of KIA Motors. This file has a clear photographer and I don't think it is you. This one and this one have original transmission location codes...you downloaded them and then claimed they were your own work and uploaded them to Commons. You have some explaining to do and the Commons admins will be interested in this also. I don't trust someone who creates accounts to avoid scrutiny.
— Berean Hunter (talk) 04:24, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
@Berean Hunter: As i said i didn't have any accounts associated but its seems i was following the guidelines of Wikipedia:Accuracy dispute to correct the facutal errors and you are reverted in amtz issue while i was giving accurate sources and wikipedia requires the reliable sources to add the content Invisibelibrarian (talk) 04:34, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
- Explain the accounts, please. You uploaded a bunch of photos at Commons where you aren't the photographer.
— Berean Hunter (talk) 04:42, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
@Berean Hunter: Yes Berean Hunter i was not a photographer and i did not upload any of them and i was from IT team party office which they are some administrators and photographers having license permissions who have decades catalog of large photos database of people associated as they are related to same political party members and we all work from the same office building with the same ip address range and this makes my account faulty i was just fact checker and add reliable sources to wikipedia who try to disrupt the pages. And lastly review your decision and unblock me as you can see the i added the factual source of amtz following Wikipedia:Accuracy dispute rules Invisibelibrarian (talk) 04:58, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
- You added many of the photos that the accounts uploaded such as these.
— Berean Hunter (talk) 05:27, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
@Berean Hunter: Yes i use them because they are available in insert photos option as i said before they are related to single political party members and uploaded by party IT team admins and they is Seperate department for maintaining images and videos section and decades before starting from 1983 and i even use the national government added photos like TU-142M_lands_at_INS_Dega_for_the_first_time_(1).jpg because they are display in insert photos option and this was nothing to do wrong with me and blocking me in wikipedia and i have upload only one audio file about name pronunciation but its not good work and i doesn't use it in the page Invisibelibrarian (talk) 05:48, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
- Hmm. Berean Hunter, the socks are not blocked. How about blocking the socks instead of the master in this specific case? ~ ToBeFree (talk) 10:22, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Berean Hunter: I haven't received any reply from you and i was the fact checker of the pages which i keep watchlist following Wikipedia:Accuracy dispute if any fault found of their accounts you mentioned you ping them but blocking me is not step. unblock me and thank you Invisibelibrarian (talk) 13:45, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
- Please do not ping unrelated editors. The appeal is open, clearly visible and will be reviewed. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 13:45, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
@ToBeFree: ok To. Be. Frei i removed it and i didn't know about the involve of other editors and thanks for your information. pls check the HITEC City page some one remove the content from the last edit as the admin reverted but still removed by latest edit as i didn't have the edit option so protect the page from unexplained content removal and unsourced facts. Thank you Invisibelibrarian (talk) 14:48, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- No worries. Regarding HITEC City, the latest edit is Special:Diff/952889533. Per WP:BURDEN, I can not undo the contribution without providing a reliable inline citation. Also, I'd like to avoid editing on behalf of a blocked user. Sorry. Please wait for the appeal to be answered. I'd like to hear Berean Hunter's opinion about blocking the socks indefinitely and converting your block to a fixed-duration one. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 14:58, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- ToBeFree, I've blocked the other accounts and upon finding Factcheckleadbot today, there is still an intent to sock by this group(?). Huon's decline is correct and someone editing for a party's purpose without declaring it is untenable with WP's mission. He cannot disavow himself with what others are doing in his office if they are editing for the same purposes.
— Berean Hunter (talk) 14:18, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
- ToBeFree, I've blocked the other accounts and upon finding Factcheckleadbot today, there is still an intent to sock by this group(?). Huon's decline is correct and someone editing for a party's purpose without declaring it is untenable with WP's mission. He cannot disavow himself with what others are doing in his office if they are editing for the same purposes.
I just protect the pages from unfactual edits and manipulations of my watchlist pages with providing reliable sources to them following accuracy dispute rules as part of my job and i didnt expect this with no one understand my version and i think its last for me to say goodbye to wikipedia forever. Thank you Invisibelibrarian (talk) 16:01, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks, Berean Hunter. Invisibelibrarian, saying "goodbye" does not mean creating another account. Stop it. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 14:24, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
@ToBeFree and Berean Hunter: Pls stop this. How can i create a new account with blocking everything from myside and blaming me for everything is not good. as i said before take charge on above mentioned accounts but not on my account and still i was just watching the pages with no more edit option and some one already modify my watchlist pages. yes Berean Hunter its part of my job to protect the pages from opposition party members who manipulated the facts fixing accuracy dispute strengthening wikipedia mission and serving genunine content to people . If Admins like you protect the pages from unfactual content there is no work like me. what can i do for living and if i didn't mentioned about my real job and hide it from you and saying truth makes me wrong for you and still you corner me. what was the use for me in creating multiple accounts for me just for editing purposes and as you said if i have multiple accounts is it wrong and i have seen admins and some users already mentioned two accounts displayed on their userinfo page and if you didn't want to unblock me just leave me alone. ToBeFree u said u cant help me as you msg me that you are talking to a criminal and because of no further chances i quit and halted my work. Thank you Invisibelibrarian (talk) 15:16, 27 April 2020 (UTC)