User talk:Dedokire
July 2020
[edit]
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Sro23 (talk) 18:18, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Dedokire (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Hello, I am not an active editor on Wikipedia, but have been using this account for 10 years. Recently (the past couple of months) I have seen articles that concern the country of North Macedonia (history, language, etc.) to be influenced with the national narrative of another foreign country by the same user multiple times, for example the article about the national anti-fascist resistance day in the "Controversy" section. There is an ongoing dispute between these two countries and I believe that such a text for a national anti-fascist resistance holiday article of a foreign country is truly unwarranted (more info here). Not being experienced with Wikipedia in these matters I've started googling around I saw that you can report a user for disruptive content, and so I did. Next thing I know, my account got blocked indefinitely because I wasn't active enough (or at least I think so?) and they labeled me as a nationalist/ethnic edit warrior (??? I'm not even active). So I'm really not sure if my latest action warrants an indefinite block for a user report and I hope that you can objectively review my case. Thank you. Best wishes, Dedokire (talk) 01:03, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Given that your first edit in years was to report an editor you had never interacted with before, following in the footsteps of an off-wiki campaign to alter Macedonian wiki pages, strikes me as obvious WP:NOTHERE and "meatpuppetry". You seem to be here to push a Macedonian agenda. We have no need for POV pushers of any kind. If you truly wish to be unblocked, you will explain what drove you to report Jingiby, and you will explain what Non-Macedonian topics you would edit if unblocked. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 06:36, 6 July 2020 (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.
Dedokire (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I didn't even know that video existed until he linked it to the report, and before I reported him I made sure to double check if there exist any other reports about him (there were none), so I am not sure which users' footsteps I am following here? One random youtube video with 3k views and 170 likes that I haven't even seen hardly makes it a "campaign" that dismisses other people's concerns with issues that relate with one user and articles about a whole country in my opinion. I frequent wikipedia a lot and independently saw this strange pattern with his edits. I haven't been editing any articles for years and made the report precisely because I wanted to avoid edit wars and all that drama and for you yourselves to do an independent review without any agenda pushing no matter the outcome, that's all I wanted. If you think he doesn't do any problems, fine, but I don't believe other users should be punished for reporting something to you they deem as inappropriate and turn out to be wrong about it. I don't understand why is it that for my first infraction in years since creating this account I get blocked indefinitely without even a warning? You yourself answered what drove me to report him: "We have no need for POV pushers of any kind.", and also because he seems to be acting like he owns those articles (in my opinion of course), that's why I did it. I am not sure if I understand the point of the second part of your question: "what Non-Macedonian topics you would edit if unblocked." Anything I believe I am competent in? I mean, what would the outcomes of this be if I hypothetically answered with "Bulgarian topics" or "Computer Science topics" for example? I'm not sure what to answer here because in my honest opinion this seems to me like a trap to double down on the block no matter the answer. Please correct me if I am wrong. Dedokire (talk) 12:06, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Unfortunately, this request has been insufficient to convince any patrolling admin to unblock. This is a procedural decline only, and you are welcome to appeal again, using a substantially reworded argument. SQLQuery me! 02:31, 3 August 2020 (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.
For someone who wants to avoid drama, dragging someone to WP:ANI is about the most drama-inciting thing you could do. Several sockpuppets of banned users (such as this guy) have tried to do the same thing you did (reporting User:Jingiby), so it's no surprise we are suspicious of you. Also, if you are not active and do not plan on editing articles, then why do you care if you are blocked? You will not be unblocked unless you give examples of what kinds of edits you would make, otherwise, what's the point of unblocking you if you aren't even going to edit anything? Sro23 (talk) 16:47, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
- What is the point of reporting someone then? What purpose does the reporting mechanism serve? Leaving the choices for the one reporting to either be absolutely 100% right or outright banned? It would've been helpful if there was a warning annotation to not report someone in threat of a ban or this wouldn't have happened in the first place. As far as I can tell, that user that you linked is Bulgarian and got banned because of a totally different topic with a couple of warnings beforehand and only after CheckUser confirmed that he was a sockpuppet, while I immediately got banned by simply under suspicion. As for your last question, I have a Computer Science degree, and have interests in heraldry, vexillology and 18th century Spring of Nations history, so I guess I will be contributing to those topics. Not to mention this is now being a textbook "guilty until proven innocent" situation... Dedokire (talk) 18:42, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
- You were not blocked for being "under suspicion", if you look at the block reason, it states you were blocked because you do not appear to be here to contribute to the encyclopedia. After years of inactivity, your first edit was to report someone you've had no interaction with before. Generally, that's not something people who are here to build an encyclopedia do. Sro23 (talk) 19:24, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
- Then why were the admins repeating it over and over again? Is there a specific rule that states to block not-so-active accounts that report other users that they think are doing something wrong? With all due respect, in the "not here to build an encyclopedia" page I am not seeing this rule being explicitly stated that warrants an indefinite ban. Dedokire (talk) 15:22, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
- You were not blocked for being "under suspicion", if you look at the block reason, it states you were blocked because you do not appear to be here to contribute to the encyclopedia. After years of inactivity, your first edit was to report someone you've had no interaction with before. Generally, that's not something people who are here to build an encyclopedia do. Sro23 (talk) 19:24, 6 July 2020 (UTC)