WooHead
August 2021
edit | This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sockpuppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. Bbb23 (talk) 16:15, 15 August 2021 (UTC) |
WooHead (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I simply included reviews from additional critics in the reception section of the article which I edited. I also expanded on the show's rating on Rotten Tomatoes and IMDb. I included legitimate citations for all my edits and I would also like to add that the critics quoted in my edits are recognised critics who contributed to the Critic section of Rotten Tomatoes and one of these critics, Grace Randolph, is listed here on Wikipedia. I am not including links to random bloggers. Update: I see that I was blocked on suspicion of being a sockpuppet for an account I've never heard of? That's bizarre and untrue but sadly, I don't know how to prove my innocence. The administrators here are free to reach out to me to discuss and ascertain my identity so we can resolve this. But I think it's a bit hasty to block a newcomer for including neutral edits from certified sources. However, I'm sure the Wikipedia administrators have their reasons
Accept reason:
The combination of behavioral evidence, technical evidence, and your explanation make it unlikely that you are in fact a sock. Bbb23 (talk) 23:16, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- Your single edit and your unblock request don't look like the edits of a new user. Have you ever edited using a different account (even if it's not HaryanaMayil)? --Bbb23 (talk) 17:04, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- I'm trying to remember? I think I may have edited something on Wikipedia before as another account (I probably lost the password to this account due to a computer crash or just plain forgetting.) I think I edited The Postal (Comic) page at some point to include other reviews since originally, only 3 (largely negative) reviews were quoted ad nauseum, creating a slanted view of the comic's reception. On a different subject, if administrator/s feel that my edits to Masters Of The Universe: Revelation didn't enhance the page or were excessive, then it's your right to remove said edits. I just felt that some more neutral reviews would help create a balanced view of the show's reception and that Grace Ranolph's review gave some insight into the dissonance between the show's critical acclaim and the online controversy (from some fans anyway.) But since my edits were undone, I won't touch the page again WooHead (talk) 17:35, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- Do you mean User:Doctorclown193 who made one edit to Postal (comics) on November 4, 2020? --Bbb23 (talk) 17:47, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- I'm trying to remember? I think I may have edited something on Wikipedia before as another account (I probably lost the password to this account due to a computer crash or just plain forgetting.) I think I edited The Postal (Comic) page at some point to include other reviews since originally, only 3 (largely negative) reviews were quoted ad nauseum, creating a slanted view of the comic's reception. On a different subject, if administrator/s feel that my edits to Masters Of The Universe: Revelation didn't enhance the page or were excessive, then it's your right to remove said edits. I just felt that some more neutral reviews would help create a balanced view of the show's reception and that Grace Ranolph's review gave some insight into the dissonance between the show's critical acclaim and the online controversy (from some fans anyway.) But since my edits were undone, I won't touch the page again WooHead (talk) 17:35, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
Probably. Like I said, I can't remember the password for the account and to be honest, I kinda blanked on the name but I did edit Postal late last year to include additional reviews to give a more balanced representation of the series' reception and I think I also corrected the publisher details (from Image to Top Cow.) Looking at the edit, the writing style is similar to mine so I guess Doctorclown193 was the name I used. As I said, I likely lost the details and password for that due to either my computer crash or just forgetting. Sorry.WooHead (talk) 18:02, 15 August 2021 (UTC) Update: If it helps clear up confusion, I use my mobile as a hotspot, allowing me to access the internet. Is it possible (since I'm in a developing country) that the mobile provider reuses IP addresses and assigns the similar or the same IPs to different customers? I'm not clued up on that sort of thing but maybe that is part of the confusion over suspected sock puppetry? WooHead (talk) 18:45, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- Interesting choice of usernames. I'm looking a little more deeply into this, so I may not respond right away. Please be patient.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:39, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
Of course. Thank you for your time. I appreciate it and please let me know if you need anything else from me. WooHead (talk) 19:46, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for your patience and civility. I have unblocked you. The reason is in the Accept above. I have also restored your edit to the article as the basis for my removal of it was only because I thought you were a sock. Sorry for all the unpleasantness.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:18, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
Thank you very much. I really appreciate it; I also appreciate your civility and dedication to the site and the steps you take to keep it safe. Have a very good week. WooHead (talk) 05:45, 16 August 2021 (UTC) Thank you for restoring my edits to the Masters Of The Universe: Revelation page. I see that someone else has since removed the edits/ critical response from Grace Randolph and Kevin Carr as they were under the impression that these critics were irrelevant. I will not add new info to the page but I hope it's acceptable that I undid the removal while explaining that both the critics in question are recognized reviewers included in the critic section of Rotten Tomatoes. WooHead (talk) 10:39, 18 August 2021 (UTC)