User talk:Millows

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hello, Millows, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to help you get started. Happy editing! - wolf 17:47, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked[edit]

Unblock[edit]

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).

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

Request reason:

I'm not a sockpuppet of this person, I only use one account (this account, and for the 2017 one I lost the password to after my hard drive died) and a vague nebulous "checkuser evidence says so" doesn't give me any actual reason. I don't know how or what led cu to think that I am. Is it my IP? Is it my edits? Could you at least elaborate because I'm very sure I've had nothing to do with this person. And please say more than just "checkuser proves it" or "IP is used by the same person" or whatever. I really have to reiterate myself here: I have nothing to do with "Nestofbirdnests", I don't know what could've led anyone to believe that I am that person, and I highly doubt I'll even get a satisfactory answer at this point. I just want to be unblocked, because again, I'm not a sockpuppet.

Decline reason:

You might get unblocked someday, but not from a request like this. We do not make public the basis of checkuser blocks like this (Put it this way: I don't have acccess to that tool myself, so I have no idea exactly what this block is based on). If we did, that sort of information would be invaluable to anyone wanting to circumvent it somehow. Perhaps this means we block some genuinely innocent users every now and then ... I don't know. It's a tradeoff; life is full of them.

I do know a little bit about how checkuser works, though, and while I certainly can't tell you those specifics I think I can confidently state that the block is more complicated than you think. — Daniel Case (talk) 06:42, 10 October 2023 (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.

Millows! | 🪧 01:11, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Daniel Case: Well in that case, is there any hope of me being unblocked? Millows! | 🪧 13:43, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I will soft-ping NinjaRobotPirate, who made the block, and see what they might say.
But aside from Checkuser, it does seem sort of interesting that twice in your first 50 edits this past July you posted queries about particular isolate languages, a subject of great interest to NoBN, but not, otherwise, to you, it seems, to the talk page of a user who focuses on language articles whom, around the same time, another confirmed sock of NoBN who was specifically harassing that user about their alleged persecution of NoBN.
You would forgive us for saying "hmmm ...". Daniel Case (talk) 04:42, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
After I lost my original account's password, and the registering of this account, I hadn't touched Wikipedia in a very long time. So, everything started to become quite new to me. I tend to have this thing where I get very interested in one topic for generally 2 weeks at most, then move on to another topic. At that point, I thought that Fdom had some background in linguistics, (specially phonology, hence why I asked about the phonology of Greenlandic and Central Puomo, which by the way, Greenlandic is not a language isolate.), and because of my curiosity, I desired to ask him about that. After he replied saying that he couldn't really answer my questions, I stopped talking to him, and never made any contact with him after. After that I rarely made edits to linguistics articles, with the only ones I can remember being about the Voiced labial–alveolar plosive and its voiced counterpart, only because it had been a page that was recently created. When two IPs (which now that I think about it seem to be strongly connected to NBoBN) made edits to an AfD and an RfD, I didn't think it was a sock of Nest, because I had no idea this whole thing was going down. I never read any of the talk page messages on Fdom. I had only noticed those IPs because the AfD they closed was broken, and had rather rude language on them. By the time I was about to revert it, it was already reverted. Later on, I was looking at related edits to the AfD and found another IP forging Fdom's signature.
I had nothing to do with those two IPs, I noticed their editing similarities, and filed an SPI. That was the last time I ever mentioned Fdom prior to my block. Millows! | 🪧 14:53, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You're on the same IP as other socks. If you want another CU to look at the evidence, you can make an unblock request or appeal to Arbcom. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 11:33, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I live in big city, and since I'm on one of the largest carriers in the country, IPs get changed alot. I don't use any VPNs or proxies, so it's far more likely that Nest happens to live somewhat close to me (by close I mean within East Coast of the United States). I've had IPs geolocating to New York despite me living no where near that place. Even if a tiny fraction of the population in my city edits wikipedia, it would still be in the several thousands, who likely use tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of IPs. Those edits to linguistics related articles and to Fdom are only vaguely related to what Nest does. Looking at their contributions they seem to mostly try to claim that a language isolate isn't one, which is something that I don't do. Millows! | 🪧 14:57, 11 October 2023 (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).

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

Request reason:

As I've said previously, I have no connections to Nestofbirdnests. There's really nothing concrete that proves that I somehow am a sockpuppet of someone I've never heard of prior to this. Just because we happen to come across to have similar IP addresses doesn't automatically mean I'm a sockpuppet. I live in a big city, using a big carrier, who very frequently change my IPs. I can do so by simply restarting my phone. It's not much proof just because we might vaguely live in the same similar area, as I've had times when my IP geolocates to states way across vertically, sometimes several hundred miles away from me. CheckUser is not magic pixie dust, and I know all of you CheckUsers know this. No system is ever perfect, I've clearly been flagged incorrectly due to a few coincidences. I've never exhibited any of the editing behavior associated with Nestofbirdnests. Simply having a few interactions with them, which clearly aren't harassment, I only edited linguistics articles a few times, all of which were constructive. Even if we look at other data, like my browser agent, it's still clear I'm not a sockpuppet. I use one of the most commonly used versions of my operating system, using the latest version of the most commonly used browsers. I also don't use any VPNs or proxies, aside from maybe my carrier having ISP proxies. I know I know little about how CheckUser works, and I'm aware I can't ask for details, so I'll never really know what led you to believe that I'm a sockpuppet, so I'm unsure as to what else I can say in order to prove in not a sockpuppet.

Decline reason:

Based on technical data, the connection is somewhere between  Highly likely and  Confirmed and is far closer than simply vaguely living in the same similar area. Yamla (talk) 11:52, 12 October 2023 (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.

As well as that, I'm not acting in any disruptive manner, or doing anything that might be frowned upon. Millows! | 🪧 11:39, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of 2014 Pakistani provincial elections[edit]

Hello Millows,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged 2014 Pakistani provincial elections for deletion, because it's a redirect that seems implausible or is an unlikely search term.

If you don't want 2014 Pakistani provincial elections to be deleted, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

-MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:14, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Millows&oldid=1194492598"