User talk:Weatherlover

Welcome!

Hello, Weatherlover, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! South Nashua (talk) 19:28, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm stupid

Weatherlover (talk) 17:47, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm stupid

I'm a stupid useless Wikipedia user Weatherlover (talk) 21:06, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

True Weatherlover (talk) 22:07, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

False - You just need the right support to help you get started and find your feet.Jason Rees (talk) 03:49, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I suck

I suck I suck I suck I suck I suck I suck I suck I suck I suck I suck I suck I suck I suck I suck I suck I suck I suck I suck Weatherlover (talk) 04:35, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We all have bad days

That's why it's good to keep something cute on hand. Cheers

Jim1138 (talk) 04:50, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

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/Swag ChannelYT, 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.

Jasper Deng (talk) 05:40, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What is happening to me?

I don't understand sock puppet. What does it mean when I am being investigated? Will I get banned from Wikipedia? I don't want to be banned. Weatherlover (talk) 06:03, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet of Swag ChannelYT (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · logs · block log · arb · rfc · lta · SPI · cuwiki) that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 07:36, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock

{{unblock=Sockpuppetry Weatherlover (talk) 12:55, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock

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).

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

Request reason:

Sockpuppstry

Decline reason:

It would appear you have been abusing multiple accounts. Please read the SPI case at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Swag ChannelYT for more details. See boilerplate below.
I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 18:55, 2 January 2018 (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.