Tuono20

March 2020

Tuono20, quit using a sock and use your main account. Most of your contributions are you reverting my edits on 3 separate articles that are not directly linked with each other, so you're clearly tracking my edits and that counts as harassment on Wikipedia, as specified in WP:WIKIHOUNDING. How pathetic are you? Feinoa (talk) 19:56, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

I apologize if you feel this way. I assure you that it was an coincidence. However, it did catch my attention that you repeatedly got into confrontation with other editors. My aim was to smooth the confrontations, not to irritate you. Take my most recent editing as an example, you removed a sentence because you thought it's unsourced, but others disagreed. I could see that you might mistake it's as unsourced because its source was cited at the end of the sentence that followed. So I made a little adjustment to clarify that the source supports both sentences. My goal was to make both sides happy and move on with their other editing. If you think it still did not address your concern, you should provide your reason why you insist removing the sentence, so that all the others can take into consideration. Tuolo20 (talk) 02:57, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

This 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).

Tuono20 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

If you have seen how I fumbled with my signatures in the talk pages, it should be clear that I am a new user rather than a sock puppet. I did not respond directly to Editor Feinoa's accusation of being a sock because as I explained to him my intention was to smooth out confrontations, so I respect his opinion of such. It does not concern me what he thinks I am. To the entire Wikipedia community, I do not see how it matters whether I'm a sock or not. If a sock can spend time participating in talks and contributing constructive editing to Wikipedia pages, rather than quick and cheap vandalism, I don't see how it has any less right than other individuals. I believe you can verify that in my editing history. Also if you have time, please also check the history of Japan Self-Defense Forces and its talk page. There is a dispute in that page. As a new user, I hope more experienced Wikipedia editors would be involve to settle the dispute. I appreciate it. Also please take as much time as you need to consider the matter, I'm not an avid editor and mostly just a reader. Thank you!

Decline reason:

"I do not see how it matters whether I'm a sock or not" – many CheckUsers would agree with this, and they will block you for acting on behalf of a sock puppet whether you are one or not. So, there isn't really much in dispute here. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:59, 30 March 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.

This 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).

Tuono20 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Thank you for taking your time to review my request. I think I misread the definition of the terminology 'sock'. I thought it is a synonym of a duplicate account. After reading the instructions a few more times, I realized that it means not only a duplicate account but also an account to violate Wikipedia policy. That was what I was trying to explain. Firstly, I'm not a duplicate account. Secondly, even if I were a duplicate account, I have contributed positively to the Wikipedia community and not done anything to violate Wikipedia policy. I believe you can verify that from my history logs. Additionally I wish you to review the editing of Japan Self-Defense Forces and discuss the decision among yourselves. From what I see, somebody removed a statement without a justifiable cause. When we asked him for an explanation, he countered with sock accusation. Even if you suspect some or all of us as socks, I believe the facts are very easy to verify in this case: (1) It can be quickly verified that the removed statement is fully supported by the cited source. (2) The removed statement has been there for many years, not just a recent addition by a suspected sock or anything. (I traced it back to at least July 2018. You are more familiar with Wikipedia tools; maybe you can find when it was first written.)

Decline reason:

You haven't been able to adequately explain your use of a VPN nor your familiarity with Wikipedia when you began editing. For those reasons, I am unable to grant your unblock request. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:22, 13 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.

• @Berean Hunter: Which other accounts are associated with this one? Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:31, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

• Callanecc, this is a behavioral block that it is someone's sock but not named. Their edits have been mostly reversions and I found it too hard to AGF when they ignored that I was reverting a sock and restored it. Their use of VPN didn't help their case.
   — Berean Hunter (talk) 11:57, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

@Tuono20: Before any administrator considers your unblock request, you will need to tell us what the accounts (or IP addresses if you didn't edit logged in) are that you've previously used to edit Wikipedia. If you would like to do that privately, you can email me or the Arbitration Committee. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 13:25, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

• Callanecc, thank you for reviewing my request, and Berean Hunter, thank you for clarifying the reasons. As I have been saying, this one is the only account I have been using to edit Wikipedia. I did not login when I was just reading articles; I only logged in when I saw something and decided to edit it. Also I did not edit without logging in. Actually that's related to what Berean Hunter said about VPN. I've never used VPN to edit; this one I'm currently using, or anyone I've used before, is/was not VPN either; it's just an IP address assigned by my ISP via DHCP. I think Wikipedia has blocked all VPN accesses, hasn't it? At least that's why I registered this account to edit in the first place, instead of doing it via VPN or directly exposing my ISP's IP address. If there is anything that may clarify that the IP address is not VPN, please let me know.

• Berean Hunter, I apologize for not recognizing your reversion as an admin work. Like I said, I'm new to the editing despite that I've been a reader of Wikipedia for a long time. I did not even know what 'sock' meant when Feinoa threw the accusation and had to look it up on wikitionary. So I didn't realized the seriousness when I saw your reversion of "rev sock". However, please take a look again at the editing of Japan Self-Defense Forces. As I said, (1) the removed sentence was fully supported by the cited source, and thus the reason given by Feinoa to remove the sentence as "unsourced" was invalid; (2) the removed sentence was not a recent addition by a sock or any vandalism. The sentence has been there for years. I do not necessarily object Feinoa's removal if there is a valid concern. So I presented my reasons in the talk page and urged Feinoa to present the reason of removal before you came in. Including that page, I have only edited 4 Wikipedia pages in total. I can explain my motivation and justification for each of them if you think it can clear things up. I edited them out of good faith, so I'm confident that I can justify them to you. And since my other 3 edits were not removed even though you thought I was a sock, I assume you also agreed that they added useful information to those Wikipedia pages. Sorry I know I should keep it short given that everybody has a busy schedule. If you'd like me to further elaborate, please let me know. But please, do take another look at Japan Self-Defense Forces whenever you have time. Thank you very much.

• To be honest Tuono20, I don't believe that you have never edited before using this account - it's obvious that you know too much about how Wikipedia works and how to edit when you first started. At this stage, I don't want to talk about Japan Self-Defense Forces as that isn't the reason you've been blocked. Regarding your claim of not using a VPN, I'll ask another CheckUser to come and take a look. {{checkuser needed}}. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:58, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

• Callanecc, thank you for your quick response. I know it's impossible to prove either way, but as I said I've been reading Wikipedia a very long time and didn't decide to edit it until recently. The motivation, if it's relevant, is that vandalism seems to have increased since the breakout of covid19, so I thought maybe I could take some time to contribute. I'm a programmer, so it's not hard to copy what other editors have done to make my edits. But you might also see that wherever copy/paste doesn't quite work, such as signature, which I still can't figure out, I would mess it up. Also I always do preview before publish; the buttons are just next to each other. If what you meant was how I know Wikipedia blocked VPN, it's because that's how I tried to edit my first page before registering this account. Wikipedia said I couldn't edit via VPN, so I registered. Anyway, please do what you have to do. Whatever the result is, I appreciate it. It's perfectly fine with me going back to be just a reader. Whether you decide to unblock me or not, please take a look at the said Wikipedia page with Berean Hunter afterwards or whenever. Thank you very much.
• @Callanecc: Unless the user can account for international travel around to the other side of the globe during pandemic times (and the no real change in edit times...then there is use of a VPN. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 09:17, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
• Callanecc and DeltaQuad, thank you for looking it up anyway. I guess I forgot to turn it off and simply assumed that Wikipedia would remind me that VPN was still on, although I don't really turn it on very often. Or maybe it's the effect of the so-called "smart DNS" that I'm using constantly, although I didn't think it would change the information of my location. Nonetheless, I'll give up and just go back to be a normal reader then, but please take a look at the editing of Japan Self-Defense Forces with Berean Hunter. I believe that one is much simpler than figuring out whether there are multiple accounts. Thank you very much.