User talk:Restflux
Welcome to Wikipedia![edit]
Welcome Restflux!Hello Restflux. Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions!
I'm Paine Ellsworth, one of the other editors here, and I hope you decide to stay and help contribute to this amazing repository of knowledge.
| Some pages of helpful information to get you started: | Some common sense Dos and Don'ts:
|
| If you need further help, you can: | or you can: | or even: |
Alternatively, leave me a message at my talk page or type {{Help me}} here on your talk page and someone will try to help.
There are many ways you can contribute to Wikipedia. Here are a few ideas:
|
|
To get some practice editing you can use a sandbox. You can create your own personal sandbox for use any time. It's perfect for working on bigger projects. Then for easy access in the future, you can put {{My sandbox}} on your user page. By the way, seeing as you haven't created a user page yet, simply click here to start it.
Please remember to:
- Always sign your posts on talk pages. You can do this either by clicking on the
button on the edit toolbar or by typing four tildes ~~~~at the end of your post. This will automatically insert your signature, a link to your talk page, and a timestamp. - Leave descriptive edit summaries for your edits. Doing so helps other editors understand what changes you have made and why you made them.
Sincerely, P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there (Leave me a message) 18:15, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
I have unblocked you since your suspicions about the other users, one of whom reported you to ANEW, being sockpuppets have turned out to be correct. Since that means the accounts are blocked indefinitely, there is no further risk of you edit warring with them.
Do keep it in mind, however, that this block was based on your behavior, not the other editors' sockpuppetry. In the future, once something is under discussion at the talk page, do not restore to your preferred version of article text until a consensus has been reached. As I suggested at ANEW, there are resources for editors to bring other voices to the discussion that should be used. Daniel Case (talk) 03:20, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
February 2023[edit]
Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.
Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice:
Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped. Girth Summit (blether) 10:10, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice:
{{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.
- @Girth Summit: I am perplexed by this block. The block entry says I am a sock puppet of a user account called Waskerton but I am not associated with this account. This is not an account that I have ever been in contact with before and especially not as I created this account very recently. Also, the sockpuppet case against Waskerton does not contain an investigation that explicitly accuses my account of being a sockpuppet of the Waskerton one, so I do not even know who the accuser is, much less have a chance to respond to the accusation. With all due respect, can you explain what is going on? Restflux (talk) 15:44, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
- Do you deny having previously edited under the account Stormandfury? Girth Summit (blether) 18:07, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Girth Summit:I've never edited under that or any of the other accounts associated with Waskerton. I don't have either the time or the motivation to edit Wikipedia in the way that account holder or account holders did. I only know that I have edited with just this account and intend to edit just the balloon article. If it helps put your doubts to rest, I will say that (with your allowance) once I am done editing that article, I will be done with editing Wikipedia. I've been here for just a few weeks and in that time, I've been accused of holding views I don't have by a sock puppet, accused of edit warring by the same sock puppet and now been accused by an unnamed editor for sockpuppetry. I have no interest going through that again and spending one second longer than I need to on this website. Restflux (talk) 04:59, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
- The technical logs tell a different story I'm afraid. Girth Summit (blether) 08:15, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Girth Summit: I don't understand how the logs could tell a different story. The sockpuppet case says one of Waskerton's sockpuppets was blocked in December of last year but that was well before I created this account. From a technical standpoint, I do not see how it is possible that I was able to create a Wikipedia account after that block if I was the other person or persons and editing from the same device using the same internet protocol address. In addition, I recently moved into my current place of residence as a renter, so perhaps the logs are showing what the previous tenants did or what the other current tenants have done. Again, with all due respect, can you explain what is going on? Restflux (talk) 17:27, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
- There is guidance on appealing blocks at WP:GAB. Best Girth Summit (blether) 21:10, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Girth Summit: one final question. I am looking at the appeals page for users who have been CheckUser blocked. One of the things it says is that I can file an appeal directly to [email protected] if I have not registered an email address on Wikipedia. I take this to mean that users filing an appeal that way would be doing so directly from their email address? Restflux (talk) 18:56, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- You can appeal in the normal way, and another checkuser will review the block. You may also appeal to Arbcom, but if you have not yet submitted an appeal here they may direct you back here. Girth Summit (blether) 11:36, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Girth Summit: I think you may have misunderstood what I was asking, but that may have been a mistake for not being clear enough on my part. To be clear I'm referring to appealing to Arbcom. My question should have read: I take this to mean that users filing an appeal that way would be doing so directly from their own (ie non-registered) email address? So by way of example if I had email called [email protected] and I didn't register that an email address on Wikipedia, then one of the ways I can still file an appeal to [email protected] is directly from [email protected]. Is this correct? Restflux (talk) 15:06, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- As far as I am aware, you can appeal to Arbcom in the manner you describe. Girth Summit (blether) 15:10, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Girth Summit: I think you may have misunderstood what I was asking, but that may have been a mistake for not being clear enough on my part. To be clear I'm referring to appealing to Arbcom. My question should have read: I take this to mean that users filing an appeal that way would be doing so directly from their own (ie non-registered) email address? So by way of example if I had email called [email protected] and I didn't register that an email address on Wikipedia, then one of the ways I can still file an appeal to [email protected] is directly from [email protected]. Is this correct? Restflux (talk) 15:06, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- You can appeal in the normal way, and another checkuser will review the block. You may also appeal to Arbcom, but if you have not yet submitted an appeal here they may direct you back here. Girth Summit (blether) 11:36, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Girth Summit: one final question. I am looking at the appeals page for users who have been CheckUser blocked. One of the things it says is that I can file an appeal directly to [email protected] if I have not registered an email address on Wikipedia. I take this to mean that users filing an appeal that way would be doing so directly from their email address? Restflux (talk) 18:56, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- There is guidance on appealing blocks at WP:GAB. Best Girth Summit (blether) 21:10, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Girth Summit: I don't understand how the logs could tell a different story. The sockpuppet case says one of Waskerton's sockpuppets was blocked in December of last year but that was well before I created this account. From a technical standpoint, I do not see how it is possible that I was able to create a Wikipedia account after that block if I was the other person or persons and editing from the same device using the same internet protocol address. In addition, I recently moved into my current place of residence as a renter, so perhaps the logs are showing what the previous tenants did or what the other current tenants have done. Again, with all due respect, can you explain what is going on? Restflux (talk) 17:27, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
- The technical logs tell a different story I'm afraid. Girth Summit (blether) 08:15, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Girth Summit:I've never edited under that or any of the other accounts associated with Waskerton. I don't have either the time or the motivation to edit Wikipedia in the way that account holder or account holders did. I only know that I have edited with just this account and intend to edit just the balloon article. If it helps put your doubts to rest, I will say that (with your allowance) once I am done editing that article, I will be done with editing Wikipedia. I've been here for just a few weeks and in that time, I've been accused of holding views I don't have by a sock puppet, accused of edit warring by the same sock puppet and now been accused by an unnamed editor for sockpuppetry. I have no interest going through that again and spending one second longer than I need to on this website. Restflux (talk) 04:59, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
- Do you deny having previously edited under the account Stormandfury? Girth Summit (blether) 18:07, 26 February 2023 (UTC)