Märt Põder ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
The first edit made by this user was in the middle a revert war on a redirect. If you query this block then a check user can be run to show that this is not a sock puppet, because I have blocked it as a duck and not through check user.
![]() | This account has been
blocked indefinitely as a suspected
sock puppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that multiple accounts are
allowed, but using them for
illegitimate reasons is not. If this is a sock puppet account, and your original account is blocked, please also note that banned or blocked users are not allowed to edit Wikipedia; if you are
banned, all edits under this account may be reverted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may
appeal this block by adding the text {{
unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below, but you should read the
guide to appealing blocks first.
PBS (
talk)
10:34, 22 February 2013 (UTC) |
Märt Põder ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I am not involved in sockpuppetry. I suppose you were indicating the redirect of Soviet and its talk page. If you really pay some attention to the diff of the talk page, you will realize, that I have not been talkig to my alter ego or anything similar and the accusation is ungrounded ( http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Talk%3ASoviet&diff=532927071&oldid=532922394). I am not responsible for other users not signing their statements properly (which probably gave you idea that there might be some sockpuppetry) and I am willing to discuss the redirect. Using Wikipedia from your bare IP and then registering yourself to write as a proper user shouldn't be cause for sockpuppetry accusations. Please, unblock me! Märt Põder ( talk) 19:06, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
Accept reason:
Following this observation on my talk page to review this block I had a look at SUL Info. It is unlikely that a sock would be created across several sister project so I will lift the block. Sorry for the inconvenience that my actions in not assuming good faith have caused. -- PBS ( talk) 16:07, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi Märt Põder,
Thanks for your email. Well, your request to move may yet succeed, to be clear. I'd argue that editing all 4 of the articles is probably the most helpful thing you could do to aid your case with some of the sources you've found. The main warning I'll offer is that article titles don't have to be perfect, or even necessarily accurate! You mention that you found scholars saying "O'Donnell's term is misleading", and maybe so, but misleading terms sometimes stick. The Dark Ages and Middle Ages are pretty contested terms, for example, but they still get used. In the same way, O'Donnell can be "wrong" but possibly still be the primary topic for the term "delegative democracy". The best way to prove otherwise is to show unadored, unexplained use of the term for contexts unrelated to O'Donnel. SnowFire ( talk) 17:39, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
Märt Põder ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
The first edit made by this user was in the middle a revert war on a redirect. If you query this block then a check user can be run to show that this is not a sock puppet, because I have blocked it as a duck and not through check user.
![]() | This account has been
blocked indefinitely as a suspected
sock puppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that multiple accounts are
allowed, but using them for
illegitimate reasons is not. If this is a sock puppet account, and your original account is blocked, please also note that banned or blocked users are not allowed to edit Wikipedia; if you are
banned, all edits under this account may be reverted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may
appeal this block by adding the text {{
unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below, but you should read the
guide to appealing blocks first.
PBS (
talk)
10:34, 22 February 2013 (UTC) |
Märt Põder ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I am not involved in sockpuppetry. I suppose you were indicating the redirect of Soviet and its talk page. If you really pay some attention to the diff of the talk page, you will realize, that I have not been talkig to my alter ego or anything similar and the accusation is ungrounded ( http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Talk%3ASoviet&diff=532927071&oldid=532922394). I am not responsible for other users not signing their statements properly (which probably gave you idea that there might be some sockpuppetry) and I am willing to discuss the redirect. Using Wikipedia from your bare IP and then registering yourself to write as a proper user shouldn't be cause for sockpuppetry accusations. Please, unblock me! Märt Põder ( talk) 19:06, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
Accept reason:
Following this observation on my talk page to review this block I had a look at SUL Info. It is unlikely that a sock would be created across several sister project so I will lift the block. Sorry for the inconvenience that my actions in not assuming good faith have caused. -- PBS ( talk) 16:07, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi Märt Põder,
Thanks for your email. Well, your request to move may yet succeed, to be clear. I'd argue that editing all 4 of the articles is probably the most helpful thing you could do to aid your case with some of the sources you've found. The main warning I'll offer is that article titles don't have to be perfect, or even necessarily accurate! You mention that you found scholars saying "O'Donnell's term is misleading", and maybe so, but misleading terms sometimes stick. The Dark Ages and Middle Ages are pretty contested terms, for example, but they still get used. In the same way, O'Donnell can be "wrong" but possibly still be the primary topic for the term "delegative democracy". The best way to prove otherwise is to show unadored, unexplained use of the term for contexts unrelated to O'Donnel. SnowFire ( talk) 17:39, 17 January 2020 (UTC)