User talk:TheBraveSFT

Welcome!

Hello, TheBraveSFT, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, your edit to Starquake (video game) does not conform to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy (NPOV). Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media.

There's a page about the NPOV policy that has tips on how to effectively write about disparate points of view without compromising the NPOV status of the article as a whole. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Below are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Chaheel Riens (talk) 15:24, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

November 2018

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for Abusing multiple accounts. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}.

User:GalahadFLT. See a previous complaint at the edit warring noticeboard. At Starquake (video game) you have restored an attribution to David McLachlan, which was one of the trademarks of GalahadFLT, and which they were warned about at the edit warring noticeboard. Needless to say, there was no consensus obtained at Talk:Starquake (video game) that McLachlan's name should be added to the article. EdJohnston (talk) 16:34, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've done no such thing, I have one account and no others.

GalahadFLT (talk) 16:46, 25 November 2018 (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).

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

Request reason:

I only have one account, and I certainly didn't make any further reverts, i'm sure you have access to IP addresses which would surely clear that up, but do I get blocked everytime someone reverts the Starquake page when I haven't touched it? The information I put before is supposed to be being "considered", why would I interupt that process? Block me if you want, but I haven't added ANYTHING to Wikipedia since my last comment to Chaheel Riens that I don't want any kind of discussion with him. GalahadFLT (talk) 16:48, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only, unblock requests must come from the blocked user themselves. 331dot (talk) 22:09, 25 November 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.

GalahadFLT, you are requesting that TheBraveSFT be unblocked? Can't that person speak for himself? EdJohnston (talk) 17:22, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've been thinking about this and believe now that TheBraveSFT is probably a 'joe job' account who is trying to get User:GalahadFLT in trouble, by imitating their misbehavior as reported at WP:AN3. So I'll withdraw anything I said about User:GalahadFLT running this account, but keep GalahadFLT under notice that they must not continue to edit war. The most recent example of this situation is Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nukleon. A checkuser determined that the person pretending to be a sock of Nukleon was really User:Architect 134. So it wasn't Nukleon's fault. I'm extending the block of User:TheBraveSFT to indefinite. EdJohnston (talk) 22:29, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Per Bbb23's advice I'm leaving the indef block of TheBraveSFT in place. This account is unrelated to GalahadFLT, per the technical findings. EdJohnston (talk) 01:45, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]