Kolossoni

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kolossoni

I'll leave this here without drawing any conclusions -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 11:54, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

I hope you realize that individual is GENUINELY not me, right? It makes me chuckle because you have literally banned a random individual who's been accused wrongly of being me when they've said they're not, going so far as to accuse another account by the name of Use999055 of being another sockpuppet of mine...

Wikipedia is a fiasco right now and I'm here following Standard offer instructions while watching all you people going for each other's throats, haha. In fact, I feel genuinely bad for the person now.

To be honest, I wouldn't have even noticed this had that individual not edit the sockpuppet investigation page. Hope you people resolve this issue without further exacerbating an already misguided judgement... Good luck. Kolossoni (talk) 13:20, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Don't get me wrong. I understand that admins are humans and you make mistakes, but since a checkuser is right around the corner and the chances of the person turning out to be not me is VERY likely, I just wanted to let you know that your judgement seems highly dictated by individuals such as Grandpallama and SLIMHANNYA who accuse anyone who do not agree with their POV to be me, an already blocked and powerless account.

I hope you will learn from this experience. Kolossoni (talk) 13:37, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Speaking of gaslighting, you blanked the parts about giving yourself a barnstar and that other award, which you admitted to in a now blanked post where you admitted socking.. I just can't believe anything you write. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 13:56, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

You need to stop creating more sock puppets. If you have not crossed already into WP:3X land, you are getting close. Thanks -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 14:13, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

I don't think that's what gaslighting means, but I admitted the things I have done wrong and is in the process of staying put. You bringing back past arguments that's already been cleared is not a sensible way of proving whatever point you're trying to make.

On that point, I am not creating any sock puppet accounts. Again, checkuser will tell, but you have been misguided into blocking someone wronfully. If my words are not enough, wait for the checkuser admins to make their comments. It's only a matter of time. Kolossoni (talk) 21:58, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Kawachinofumi clan moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Kawachinofumi clan. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back.  // Timothy :: talk  01:07, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Kawachinofumi clan

Hello, Kolossoni. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Kawachinofumi clan, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 11:10, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

This user is asking that his block be reviewed:

Kolossoni (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.

It has been quite some time since my ban from Wikipedia, and though I have visited the site seeking minor/general information from time to time, I started to feel a strong urge to become part of the community again by starting a new leaf. Looking back, I can see that my past behaviours were inexcusable. I am guilty of sockpoppetry and pretending to be individuals who I am not. Over the past several months, I have realized that such fraudulent actions not only muddied the genuine discourse within the community, but also took away the unbiased and civil attitude one must keep in life. I cannot stress enough about how many times I felt awkward visiting Wikipedia after my ban, knowing it was a site that I've made bad blood and caused a ruckus. It is not an understatement to claim that I was humbled by the time that was indirectly given to me to self reflect.

However, I am not going to prevaricate as I'm speaking genuinely this time. For example, I was accused of making additional sockpuppet accounts (after my ban) and was surprised to see that certain individuals were being labeled as "my puppet", assuming I was using a general IP address to bypass my ban. I do not know what has become of that person, but I can say that my talk page shows remnants of a rather contentious interaction between me and a fellow admin. As evident, I would be lying if I said I wasn't salty about being accused again only after a week since I was banned, it was like opening up a fresh wound that was in the process of being healed for me. However, it would be worse to try and bury my past actions again by trying to "delete" the evidence to make myself look clean, so I decided to let it stay on my talk page for anyone who had access to it.

Suffice to say, my disdain eventually dissolved over time and today, I have no bad blood with anybody who interracted with me in the past, good or bad. In truth, I'm a knowledge seeking, science loving, history buff who wants nothing but to add to the myriad of articles that are currently present in Wikipedia, as I do not have any innate interest in edit wars or peer to peer banter. My main goal is (and always was) to help contribute to articles that need my linguistic expertise and help translate non-English articles for the community. It would be an understatement to say that I felt feelings of helplessness after receiving notifications about past contributions I had made being brought up on my feed, knowing I could do nothing about it to help improve making the articles more appropriate for Wikipedia's standards with my current state. I know that words on a screen cannot convey one's true emotions to the reader to the fullest extent, and I know this is one of many appeals this community has seen over the years, but I speak with deepest sincerity and conviction that I promise to focus on improving articles rather than trying to create clout or cause drama this time, and I cannot stress that enough.

Therefore, my only request is to consider unblocking only my main account (this one) and allowing me to be part of the community once more. Only with this time, I will stay true to my words and become a healthy-minded, proactive contributor of Wikipedia.

Notes:

• In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
• Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=To whom it may concern. It has been quite some time since my ban from Wikipedia, and though I have visited the site seeking minor/general information from time to time, I started to feel a strong urge to become part of the community again by starting a new leaf. Looking back, I can see that my past behaviours were inexcusable. I am guilty of sockpoppetry and pretending to be individuals who I am not. Over the past several months, I have realized that such fraudulent actions not only muddied the genuine discourse within the community, but also took away the unbiased and civil attitude one must keep in life. I cannot stress enough about how many times I felt awkward visiting Wikipedia after my ban, knowing it was a site that I've made bad blood and caused a ruckus. It is not an understatement to claim that I was humbled by the time that was indirectly given to me to self reflect. However, I am not going to prevaricate as I'm speaking genuinely this time. For example, I was accused of making additional sockpuppet accounts (after my ban) and was surprised to see that certain individuals were being labeled as "my puppet", assuming I was using a general IP address to bypass my ban. I do not know what has become of that person, but I can say that my talk page shows remnants of a rather contentious interaction between me and a fellow admin. As evident, I would be lying if I said I wasn't salty about being accused again only after a week since I was banned, it was like opening up a fresh wound that was in the process of being healed for me. However, it would be worse to try and bury my past actions again by trying to "delete" the evidence to make myself look clean, so I decided to let it stay on my talk page for anyone who had access to it. Suffice to say, my disdain eventually dissolved over time and today, I have no bad blood with anybody who interracted with me in the past, good or bad. In truth, I'm a knowledge seeking, science loving, history buff who wants nothing but to add to the myriad of articles that are currently present in Wikipedia, as I do not have any innate interest in edit wars or peer to peer banter. My main goal is (and always was) to help contribute to articles that need my linguistic expertise and help translate non-English articles for the community. It would be an understatement to say that I felt feelings of helplessness after receiving notifications about past contributions I had made being brought up on my feed, knowing I could do nothing about it to help improve making the articles more appropriate for Wikipedia's standards with my current state. I know that words on a screen cannot convey one's true emotions to the reader to the fullest extent, and I know this is one of many appeals this community has seen over the years, but I speak with deepest sincerity and conviction that I promise to focus on improving articles rather than trying to create clout or cause drama this time, and I cannot stress that enough. Therefore, my only request is to consider unblocking only my main account (this one) and allowing me to be part of the community once more. Only with this time, I will stay true to my words and become a healthy-minded, proactive contributor of Wikipedia. |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=To whom it may concern. It has been quite some time since my ban from Wikipedia, and though I have visited the site seeking minor/general information from time to time, I started to feel a strong urge to become part of the community again by starting a new leaf. Looking back, I can see that my past behaviours were inexcusable. I am guilty of sockpoppetry and pretending to be individuals who I am not. Over the past several months, I have realized that such fraudulent actions not only muddied the genuine discourse within the community, but also took away the unbiased and civil attitude one must keep in life. I cannot stress enough about how many times I felt awkward visiting Wikipedia after my ban, knowing it was a site that I've made bad blood and caused a ruckus. It is not an understatement to claim that I was humbled by the time that was indirectly given to me to self reflect. However, I am not going to prevaricate as I'm speaking genuinely this time. For example, I was accused of making additional sockpuppet accounts (after my ban) and was surprised to see that certain individuals were being labeled as "my puppet", assuming I was using a general IP address to bypass my ban. I do not know what has become of that person, but I can say that my talk page shows remnants of a rather contentious interaction between me and a fellow admin. As evident, I would be lying if I said I wasn't salty about being accused again only after a week since I was banned, it was like opening up a fresh wound that was in the process of being healed for me. However, it would be worse to try and bury my past actions again by trying to "delete" the evidence to make myself look clean, so I decided to let it stay on my talk page for anyone who had access to it. Suffice to say, my disdain eventually dissolved over time and today, I have no bad blood with anybody who interracted with me in the past, good or bad. In truth, I'm a knowledge seeking, science loving, history buff who wants nothing but to add to the myriad of articles that are currently present in Wikipedia, as I do not have any innate interest in edit wars or peer to peer banter. My main goal is (and always was) to help contribute to articles that need my linguistic expertise and help translate non-English articles for the community. It would be an understatement to say that I felt feelings of helplessness after receiving notifications about past contributions I had made being brought up on my feed, knowing I could do nothing about it to help improve making the articles more appropriate for Wikipedia's standards with my current state. I know that words on a screen cannot convey one's true emotions to the reader to the fullest extent, and I know this is one of many appeals this community has seen over the years, but I speak with deepest sincerity and conviction that I promise to focus on improving articles rather than trying to create clout or cause drama this time, and I cannot stress that enough. Therefore, my only request is to consider unblocking only my main account (this one) and allowing me to be part of the community once more. Only with this time, I will stay true to my words and become a healthy-minded, proactive contributor of Wikipedia. |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=To whom it may concern. It has been quite some time since my ban from Wikipedia, and though I have visited the site seeking minor/general information from time to time, I started to feel a strong urge to become part of the community again by starting a new leaf. Looking back, I can see that my past behaviours were inexcusable. I am guilty of sockpoppetry and pretending to be individuals who I am not. Over the past several months, I have realized that such fraudulent actions not only muddied the genuine discourse within the community, but also took away the unbiased and civil attitude one must keep in life. I cannot stress enough about how many times I felt awkward visiting Wikipedia after my ban, knowing it was a site that I've made bad blood and caused a ruckus. It is not an understatement to claim that I was humbled by the time that was indirectly given to me to self reflect. However, I am not going to prevaricate as I'm speaking genuinely this time. For example, I was accused of making additional sockpuppet accounts (after my ban) and was surprised to see that certain individuals were being labeled as "my puppet", assuming I was using a general IP address to bypass my ban. I do not know what has become of that person, but I can say that my talk page shows remnants of a rather contentious interaction between me and a fellow admin. As evident, I would be lying if I said I wasn't salty about being accused again only after a week since I was banned, it was like opening up a fresh wound that was in the process of being healed for me. However, it would be worse to try and bury my past actions again by trying to "delete" the evidence to make myself look clean, so I decided to let it stay on my talk page for anyone who had access to it. Suffice to say, my disdain eventually dissolved over time and today, I have no bad blood with anybody who interracted with me in the past, good or bad. In truth, I'm a knowledge seeking, science loving, history buff who wants nothing but to add to the myriad of articles that are currently present in Wikipedia, as I do not have any innate interest in edit wars or peer to peer banter. My main goal is (and always was) to help contribute to articles that need my linguistic expertise and help translate non-English articles for the community. It would be an understatement to say that I felt feelings of helplessness after receiving notifications about past contributions I had made being brought up on my feed, knowing I could do nothing about it to help improve making the articles more appropriate for Wikipedia's standards with my current state. I know that words on a screen cannot convey one's true emotions to the reader to the fullest extent, and I know this is one of many appeals this community has seen over the years, but I speak with deepest sincerity and conviction that I promise to focus on improving articles rather than trying to create clout or cause drama this time, and I cannot stress that enough. Therefore, my only request is to consider unblocking only my main account (this one) and allowing me to be part of the community once more. Only with this time, I will stay true to my words and become a healthy-minded, proactive contributor of Wikipedia. |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

In your statement above, you are acknowledging that you did engage in sockpuppetry, but you're also saying that some of it wasn't you. I don't know whether that's true or not, but perhaps this request would be easier to evaluate if you were to list all the accounts that you are acknowledging you controlled, and which accounts/IPs you are telling us were not you. I'll note for the benefit of any other admins who might come across this that I just ran a check; Kolossoni posted the above request using an IP that they have used in the past, and which has no other traffic on within the CU window. Girth Summit _(blether) 16:42, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your time and consideration. It is greatly appreciated regardless of the future outcome.

As I am aware, the most prominent account I used was this one, but as "puppets" I had:

Turtle Historian, 素敵なカタチ, Crumpets & Muffins

and one more account (which I forgot) I made AFTER I was banned, not to edit or bypass the ban, but to use the accessibility features that was only available for registered users at the time such as dark mode and other features. I did not realize that even the act of making another account was not allowed, but it was a genuine mistake on my part and I discarded it asap. (It's been over half a year so my memory might not be the clearest...)

The individual who is NOT me was an individual who was using a general IP address for their identity that was accused of being me, and this is a hill I am willing to die on even though I know that my track record is not the greatest. Regardless, I am willing to stand for what's right this time. Kolossoni (talk) 17:03, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I'll try to find time to review all this in the coming days - I'll need to refamiliarise myself with the case, with your own activities that led up to the block, and with those of the IP editor who you claim was somebody else. I'll add that any admin who comes across this request before I get back to it is welcome to review it - as far as the CU element is confirmed, there is no technical evidence of recent violations as far as I can see. Girth Summit _(blether) 17:19, 10 November 2024 (UTC)