User talk:Soupforone

March 2018

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. 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 for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Nick-D (talk) 23:16, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

This block has been applied per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Middayexpress Nick-D (talk) 23:16, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

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

---

Request reason:

I request an unblock of my account. Reasons as per WP:GAPB-- (1) I have read the closing rationale on the case and understand it. (2) The block is incorrect, as I have provided statistical data demonstrating that I am not socking or meatpuppeting, including generally different normal edit times, durations, edit summaries, edited pages (over 97% of total edited pages aren't shared), and data sizes [1]. (3) I also provided an ip address associated with the Middayexpress account for the Checkuser clerk to confirm that we are different editors [2], but the case was closed before a clerk had a chance to run the Checkuser tool. (4) Two of the moderators who commented in the case's administrator area, Drmies and Nick-D, have had past issues with the editor Middayexpress [3] [4]. As per WP:INVOLVED and WP:ADMINISTRATORABUSE, they are therefore not neutral administrators in this case. (5) Nick-D both closed the case and blocked me although he has a conflict of interest in it. (6) The closing rationale for the case contains factual errors. Nick-D claims therein that there were no dissenting opinions, when actually the editors AcidSnow [5] and Lorstaking [6] dissented. I therefore ask that I be unblocked so that the case may continue normally, without interference by involved moderators. Should an uninvolved administrator later examine the Checkuser tool and other data and determine otherwise, I will be mature about the outcome and in my appeal I will promise to follow Wikipedia community customs, including a WP:CLEANSTART if required. Soupforone (talk) 04:55, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

Notes:

• In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
• Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=I request an unblock of my account. [[Wikipedia:Guide_to_appealing_blocks#Give_a_good_reason_for_your_unblock|Reasons]] as per [[WP:GAPB]]-- (1) I have read the closing rationale on the case and understand it. (2) The block is incorrect, as I have provided statistical data demonstrating that I am not socking or meatpuppeting, including generally different normal edit times, durations, edit summaries, edited pages (over 97% of total edited pages aren't shared), and data sizes [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Middayexpress&curid=56624254&diff=833337272&oldid=833337172#Summary]. (3) I also provided an ip address associated with the Middayexpress account for the Checkuser clerk to confirm that we are different editors [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Middayexpress&curid=56624254&diff=833337272&oldid=833337172#For_Checkuser_clerk], but the case was closed before a clerk had a chance to run the Checkuser tool. (4) Two of the moderators who commented in the case's administrator area, Drmies and Nick-D, have had past issues with the editor Middayexpress [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Yibir#Yibir] [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AMiddayexpress&type=revision&diff=595628370&oldid=595628331#Somali_armed_forces_and_civil_war_articles]. As per [[WP:INVOLVED]] and [[WP:ADMINISTRATORABUSE]], they are therefore not neutral administrators in this case. (5) Nick-D both closed the case and blocked me although he has a conflict of interest in it. (6) The closing rationale for the case contains factual errors. Nick-D claims therein that there were no dissenting opinions, when actually the editors AcidSnow [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ASockpuppet_investigations%2FMiddayexpress&type=revision&diff=828121123&oldid=828094796] and Lorstaking [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ASockpuppet_investigations%2FMiddayexpress&type=revision&diff=827000152&oldid=826908143] dissented. I therefore ask that I be unblocked so that the case may continue normally, without interference by involved moderators. Should an uninvolved administrator later examine the Checkuser tool and other data and determine otherwise, I will be mature about the outcome and in my appeal I will promise to follow Wikipedia community customs, including a [[WP:CLEANSTART]] if required. [[User:Soupforone|Soupforone]] ([[User talk:Soupforone#top|talk]]) 04:55, 31 March 2018 (UTC) |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=I request an unblock of my account. [[Wikipedia:Guide_to_appealing_blocks#Give_a_good_reason_for_your_unblock|Reasons]] as per [[WP:GAPB]]-- (1) I have read the closing rationale on the case and understand it. (2) The block is incorrect, as I have provided statistical data demonstrating that I am not socking or meatpuppeting, including generally different normal edit times, durations, edit summaries, edited pages (over 97% of total edited pages aren't shared), and data sizes [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Middayexpress&curid=56624254&diff=833337272&oldid=833337172#Summary]. (3) I also provided an ip address associated with the Middayexpress account for the Checkuser clerk to confirm that we are different editors [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Middayexpress&curid=56624254&diff=833337272&oldid=833337172#For_Checkuser_clerk], but the case was closed before a clerk had a chance to run the Checkuser tool. (4) Two of the moderators who commented in the case's administrator area, Drmies and Nick-D, have had past issues with the editor Middayexpress [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Yibir#Yibir] [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AMiddayexpress&type=revision&diff=595628370&oldid=595628331#Somali_armed_forces_and_civil_war_articles]. As per [[WP:INVOLVED]] and [[WP:ADMINISTRATORABUSE]], they are therefore not neutral administrators in this case. (5) Nick-D both closed the case and blocked me although he has a conflict of interest in it. (6) The closing rationale for the case contains factual errors. Nick-D claims therein that there were no dissenting opinions, when actually the editors AcidSnow [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ASockpuppet_investigations%2FMiddayexpress&type=revision&diff=828121123&oldid=828094796] and Lorstaking [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ASockpuppet_investigations%2FMiddayexpress&type=revision&diff=827000152&oldid=826908143] dissented. I therefore ask that I be unblocked so that the case may continue normally, without interference by involved moderators. Should an uninvolved administrator later examine the Checkuser tool and other data and determine otherwise, I will be mature about the outcome and in my appeal I will promise to follow Wikipedia community customs, including a [[WP:CLEANSTART]] if required. [[User:Soupforone|Soupforone]] ([[User talk:Soupforone#top|talk]]) 04:55, 31 March 2018 (UTC) |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=I request an unblock of my account. [[Wikipedia:Guide_to_appealing_blocks#Give_a_good_reason_for_your_unblock|Reasons]] as per [[WP:GAPB]]-- (1) I have read the closing rationale on the case and understand it. (2) The block is incorrect, as I have provided statistical data demonstrating that I am not socking or meatpuppeting, including generally different normal edit times, durations, edit summaries, edited pages (over 97% of total edited pages aren't shared), and data sizes [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Middayexpress&curid=56624254&diff=833337272&oldid=833337172#Summary]. (3) I also provided an ip address associated with the Middayexpress account for the Checkuser clerk to confirm that we are different editors [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Middayexpress&curid=56624254&diff=833337272&oldid=833337172#For_Checkuser_clerk], but the case was closed before a clerk had a chance to run the Checkuser tool. (4) Two of the moderators who commented in the case's administrator area, Drmies and Nick-D, have had past issues with the editor Middayexpress [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Yibir#Yibir] [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AMiddayexpress&type=revision&diff=595628370&oldid=595628331#Somali_armed_forces_and_civil_war_articles]. As per [[WP:INVOLVED]] and [[WP:ADMINISTRATORABUSE]], they are therefore not neutral administrators in this case. (5) Nick-D both closed the case and blocked me although he has a conflict of interest in it. (6) The closing rationale for the case contains factual errors. Nick-D claims therein that there were no dissenting opinions, when actually the editors AcidSnow [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ASockpuppet_investigations%2FMiddayexpress&type=revision&diff=828121123&oldid=828094796] and Lorstaking [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ASockpuppet_investigations%2FMiddayexpress&type=revision&diff=827000152&oldid=826908143] dissented. I therefore ask that I be unblocked so that the case may continue normally, without interference by involved moderators. Should an uninvolved administrator later examine the Checkuser tool and other data and determine otherwise, I will be mature about the outcome and in my appeal I will promise to follow Wikipedia community customs, including a [[WP:CLEANSTART]] if required. [[User:Soupforone|Soupforone]] ([[User talk:Soupforone#top|talk]]) 04:55, 31 March 2018 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}