User talk:Facttell

March 2021

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in the Horn of Africa (defined as including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and adjoining areas if involved in related disputes). Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Boud (talk) 15:31, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Block notice

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

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 why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:25, 17 March 2021 (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).

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

Request reason:

Greetings, User:Ponyo, I am quite surprised on being blocked. But I can say that my account is not being abused as a sock. I have edited and have had good discourse with fellow editors. I have not abused or did any of violations listed. I don’t know what else to say then I request to be unblocked? I don’t know all of the rules but what or whom requested a Checkuser?

Decline reason:

Checkuser verified abuser of multiple accounts. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇} 22:30, 17 March 2021 (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.

Facttell (talk) 21:36, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The checkuser results show unambiguously that you are Clownshking evading your block. I won't be replying further here as I don't engage with editors denying the obvious.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:40, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I would like another Admin because your angry response is biased against me and or my edits.Facttell (talk) 22:03, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Maxim:, Greetings, I am requesting an unblock however User: Ponyo has angrily shown a bias against me. After looking at https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User_talk:Ponyo#Thanks , where appears some type of secret request from user:Boud, or did Ponyo just went on fishing expedition? Is Ponyo working with this editor to get editors blocked. I discussed with The editor and I thought we were editing with good faith. But I feel Ponyo has abused his Checkuser permissions at the request of an editor without formal oversight. Ponyo’s refusal to even talk begs the question what’s the point of even having an unblock request or formal proceedings if Checkuser can secretly work with other editors? I am requesting to be unblocked because this block was initiated in bad faith and with motives to push a certain POV in pages I editted? My apologies if this sounds aggressive!Facttell (talk) 22:43, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]