User talk:Dragoon17cc

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Dragoon17cc, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your edits to the page TransAsia Airways Flight 222 have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may be removed if they have not yet been. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles. Additionally, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! –Wine Guy~Talk 16:04, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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).

Dragoon17cc (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

the reason of Abusing multiple accounts: Please see: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dragoon17cc is no longer exits. I was released in zh wikipedia

Decline reason:

You are blocked here under en-wiki's policy on multiple accounts, which you have violated a number of times. You will need to address your conduct on this Wikipedia if you wish to be unblocked here. Yunshui ^雲 _水 16:54, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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).

Dragoon17cc (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

the reason of Abusing multiple accounts is no longer exits. I was released in zh wikipedia

Decline reason:

As Yunshui said, above, we are not interested in what happened on zh Wikipedia, we are only interested in what happened and what will happen here on the English Wikipedia. To be unblocked here, at the very least we'd need you to address Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dragoon17cc/Archive, and provide a convincing explanation of how your editing would be different if you are unblocked. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:31, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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).

Dragoon17cc (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

None of these accounts have been used in en wiki, when the hell blocking me?

Decline reason:

Declined. Creating another account and editing while this unblock request was waiting is socking to evade a block. This account is Technically indistinguishable to Dragoon17ccc. You were also IP socking before you created the account going back to Nov. 10.
— Berean Hunter (talk) 19:40, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Yes they have - here are the contributions of Alphabravocharlie, Goldskies, Golfhotelindia. I can see that there is actually very little activity at en.wiki from them, and no obvious overlap, so I'm becoming sympathetic to the idea of an unblock - but I suggest the first step you would need to make is to identify all of the accounts you have used so that their contributions here can be properly checked. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:39, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation[edit]

Hi. 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/Dragoon17cc, 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.

B dash (talk) 06:09, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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).

Dragoon17cc (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I was blocked for no reason Dragoon17cc (talk) 17:25, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Transparently false. Yamla (talk) 18:35, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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).

Dragoon17cc (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I was blocked for no reason. I was accused of using puppet, which is automatically created when I lock in through other languages. No vandalism was made in English Wikipedia

Decline reason:

First, you were and you know it, as noted in all the other declined unblock requests that litter this page. Yet you keep on saying it. Who do you actually think might believe you?

Second, that's not how account creation works and you know it.

Third, so what? It's not what you do with a sock account that matters, it's that you create them in the first place. You know this by now.

Fourth, I am really thinking you have competence problems. You may be better off working on zhwiki for now.

Lastly, if you thought you would get to apologize or explain better in another request, I'm sorry, because while I was writing this I decided it is well past time to revoke your talk page access, as your narrative has grown tiresome. Have a nice day. — Daniel Case (talk) 06:25, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

Daniel Case (talk) 06:27, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]