{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
Bbb23 (
talk)
00:04, 21 July 2019 (UTC)Wikiemirati ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Hello. I use account user:masgouf when I am using a public computer or at work. I did the reverts on 2019 AFC Asian Cup as a single individual. Never meant for it to deceive or mislead other editors, disrupt discussions, distort consensus. I have not tilted consensus building in my favor using that account and never intended to mislead others for being a different individual. I have mentioned "reverted by two users" mentioning myself and another user, Anbans 585, at the editing comments. I did not use my other account to disrupt consensus building. Heck, I have said the same statements, reasons, and edit comments in Talk:2019 AFC Asian Cup discussion and one can infer that I am the same person for giving the same reasons. The other account is intended to be used on public computers, work, or library computers or when I focus on Iraq-related articles. I have made the edits while at work and while I was editing Iraq-related articles when I had my other account logged in. I used to do that as an IP edits but decided to create an account to hide my IP address. Never intended for the account to be used as a strawman sock and never argued on talk page discussion as two separate users or endorsed my point of view as two separate users. I have that account for legitimate security reasons at work. I did not create it to avoid sanctions, evade blocks, or otherwise violate community standards and policies. I admit I should have not used my work computer to edit in an article from my other account to not give off the impression that I am another person, I have made that mistake and I understand I that did that in an oversight and own up to that mistake. However, I did not claim that I am a different person and honestly never intended to suggest that I am a different person. You would noticed I even completed responses and used the same word choice when using the other account in edit summaries. I think I am a bit knowledgeable of wiki-policy and rules and I know that a check-user would be able to spot on sock puppetry if I was acting or pretending to be as two different people, as I have seen countless people banned who did. Please let me know if there's no reconciliation of that oversight and if that oversight is a big enough reason to have me kicked out of this project indefinitely. Thank you. -- Wikiemirati ( talk) 00:44, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I do not see that you disclosed anywhere that you had alternate accounts. You say people could infer that the two accounts were operated by the same person because you "have said the same statements, reasons, and edit comments in Talk:2019 AFC Asian Cup discussion". The only comment by Masgouf on a talk page, ever, was this. That's about as far from your "Wikiemirati" style of talk page comments as it can get. Given your further deceptive actions documented below, I find your explanation unconvincing. Huon ( talk) 01:28, 21 July 2019 (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.
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Alexandermcnabb ( talk) 10:20, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:UAEAF F16E Block 60, Saudi Arabian-led intervention in Yemen, 2015.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:
{{
Di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}}
below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason>
with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 04:39, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wikiemirati, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.
SharabSalam ( talk) 14:23, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
You have been mentioned here: /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Wikiemirati#Suspected_sockpuppets Snooganssnoogans ( talk) 17:11, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
Bbb23 (
talk)
00:04, 21 July 2019 (UTC)Wikiemirati ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Hello. I use account user:masgouf when I am using a public computer or at work. I did the reverts on 2019 AFC Asian Cup as a single individual. Never meant for it to deceive or mislead other editors, disrupt discussions, distort consensus. I have not tilted consensus building in my favor using that account and never intended to mislead others for being a different individual. I have mentioned "reverted by two users" mentioning myself and another user, Anbans 585, at the editing comments. I did not use my other account to disrupt consensus building. Heck, I have said the same statements, reasons, and edit comments in Talk:2019 AFC Asian Cup discussion and one can infer that I am the same person for giving the same reasons. The other account is intended to be used on public computers, work, or library computers or when I focus on Iraq-related articles. I have made the edits while at work and while I was editing Iraq-related articles when I had my other account logged in. I used to do that as an IP edits but decided to create an account to hide my IP address. Never intended for the account to be used as a strawman sock and never argued on talk page discussion as two separate users or endorsed my point of view as two separate users. I have that account for legitimate security reasons at work. I did not create it to avoid sanctions, evade blocks, or otherwise violate community standards and policies. I admit I should have not used my work computer to edit in an article from my other account to not give off the impression that I am another person, I have made that mistake and I understand I that did that in an oversight and own up to that mistake. However, I did not claim that I am a different person and honestly never intended to suggest that I am a different person. You would noticed I even completed responses and used the same word choice when using the other account in edit summaries. I think I am a bit knowledgeable of wiki-policy and rules and I know that a check-user would be able to spot on sock puppetry if I was acting or pretending to be as two different people, as I have seen countless people banned who did. Please let me know if there's no reconciliation of that oversight and if that oversight is a big enough reason to have me kicked out of this project indefinitely. Thank you. -- Wikiemirati ( talk) 00:44, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I do not see that you disclosed anywhere that you had alternate accounts. You say people could infer that the two accounts were operated by the same person because you "have said the same statements, reasons, and edit comments in Talk:2019 AFC Asian Cup discussion". The only comment by Masgouf on a talk page, ever, was this. That's about as far from your "Wikiemirati" style of talk page comments as it can get. Given your further deceptive actions documented below, I find your explanation unconvincing. Huon ( talk) 01:28, 21 July 2019 (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.
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Alexandermcnabb ( talk) 10:20, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:UAEAF F16E Block 60, Saudi Arabian-led intervention in Yemen, 2015.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:
{{
Di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}}
below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason>
with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 04:39, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wikiemirati, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.
SharabSalam ( talk) 14:23, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
You have been mentioned here: /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Wikiemirati#Suspected_sockpuppets Snooganssnoogans ( talk) 17:11, 19 March 2022 (UTC)