User talk:1covfefe
Welcome
Blocked as a sockpuppet
[edit]
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.
1covfefe (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
So you're just gonna block everyone who is for labeling Poland as a parliamentary republic based on appropriate sources, as a "suspected sock puppet of Urabura?" I see you blocked User:TheKamines too. I only started my Wikipedia adventure two weeks ago. It's a funny way of achieving consensus. If this is a free encyclopedia where all opposing voices are not stifled, I request an unblock as I am neither TheKamines nor Urabura (never even saw the other guy's edits). I do not and will not break any WPs.1covfefe (talk) 22:36, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Not a very persuasive appeal, if I may say so. And it's checkuser evidence vs. your word. CU trumps. I'm declining your unblock request. If you wish to re-appeal, please see WP:GAB for advice on how. DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:02, 8 February 2025 (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.
1covfefe (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Right. Checkuser is just an IP check and most of Europe uses dynamic IPs. Let me just interject that I'm neither TheKamines nor Urabura, and on their part, I don't think they're related either, so I think it's not just me who was wrongly punished and that's just sad that dissenting voices are stifled like this. As for me, aside from my previous guarantee of respecting Wikipedia policy--which is of course a must for any editor--let me deal with this like so: I won't attempt to edit the Poland page for the next few months, so as not to appear disruptive, in any way, and show my good faith. If I receive this singular token of trust, I request and hope you unblock me and I shall abide by this. 1covfefe (talk) 22:31, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Your denial does not outweigh the checkuser evidence. PhilKnight (talk) 10:42, 10 February 2025 (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.
- Have you previously edited on another account? -- asilvering (talk) 01:39, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
1covfefe (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Urabura, I see, was blocked in 2022 and finally in 2023. This timespan of over 1 yr and Dynamic IP ensures that IP overlap is essentially meaningless. NOW for a final argument, I checked his precise edits further to find out why you think I'm this guy, and I see although he focused on the Poland article, his edits were different and random, he was edit-warring over the Tourism section and so on. In my editing myself I do not go below the lede and infobox of almost any article. So even in the precise editting pattern there is no overlap, so I'm at a loss as to what you find so similar that you think I'm this 1 guy who got banned almost 1.5 years ago. As for me, aside from my previous guarantee of respecting Wikipedia policy--which is of course a must for any editor--let me deal with this like so: I won't attempt to edit the Poland page for the next few months, so as not to appear disruptive, in any way, and show my good faith. If I receive this singular token of trust, I request and hope you unblock me and I shall abide by this. 1covfefe (talk) 00:05, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
Decline reason:
100% confirmed abuser of multiple accounts, needing no data to verify other than what's currently available to checkuser (which doesn't include anything prior to late last year.) --jpgordon𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇 01:37, 11 February 2025 (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.