User talk:BrandolinisLaw

October 2022

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 ~~~~}}. Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:44, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a reason you are blocking peer-reviewed science from a page? This is not a ban evasion, this is a new peer-reviewed study about the false claims being made by the group that meets all the wiki claims Wikipedia:Qualify evidence requirements for inclusion as science. BrandolinisLaw (talk) 20:51, 20 October 2022 (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).

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

Request reason:

There was a huge study being discussed all over the Internet a few days ago that should be included on the relevant wikipedia page. This is not a ban evasion. I see someone previously posted the text, but I provided a wiki-formatted scientific reference in the discussion as required by the page block. I believe I operated completely within the requirements of wikipedia requesting to add peer-reviewed, scientific data consistent with Wikipedia:Qualify evidence.

Decline reason:

Wikipedia has articles, not pages. There is a difference between a ban and a block, you are blocked. This request does not address the reason for the block, block evasion. If you are blocked under any account or IP you edited under, you may not edit under any account or IP until that block is removed. 331dot (talk) 21:36, 20 October 2022 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

I have read the guide to appealing blocks and believe I qualify under mistaken identity. I am not a part of whatever edit issues were ongoing. If concerns remain, I am open to a conditional unblock, as I am confident my posts of scientific articles is likely to improve Wiki articles. BrandolinisLaw (talk) 22:03, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Straight to an article targeted by this sockpuppeteer? You have some explaining to do. MER-C 18:28, 21 October 2022 (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.