User talk:Glauinha

July 2021

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).

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

---

Request reason:

First of all, thank you for take care of Wikipedia. I would like that you know that I wasn't "socking". I just change the loggins because I have my "personal" account (this) and I'm too use the "editor" account (Cafeina). It's is important to mantaince my privacity, specially when I'm edditing about governament. Now, that I realized that it can be a problem, I do a commitment about just using the "editor" account.

Decline reason:

This was not a legitimate use of alternate accounts. Both accounts exclusively inappropriately edited Draft:Brazilian Trade and Investment Promotion Agency. So, not only a clear and straightforward violation of WP:SOCK which, despite your claim, definitely had nothing to do with protecting your privacy, but also both accounts contributed inappropriately. Yamla (talk) 11:32, 18 July 2021 (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.

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).

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

---

Request reason:

Thank you for your answer. However, under Wikipedia's privacy rules, I could use multiple accounts, and that's what I was based on. Therefore, I would like you to reconsider my request. Also, I'd like to make it clear that my goal here has always been to contribute to Wikipedia and its users. However, only after much research did I understand that my user level was not able to publish texts in English. I apologize but point out that this was not clear at the time of publication.

Decline reason:

"... under Wikipedia's privacy rules, I could use multiple accounts" No, you can't. WP:SOCK cannot be more crystal clear than it is: "The general rule is one editor, one account." We do allow some admins to maintain separate regular accounts so that they may edit on computers and networks that they do not consider secure enough to use their administrative accounts on. But those have to be done in a completely obvious and disclosed way, usually the names are almost identical, and that has to do with security not privacy. If you want to protect your privacy, you would best use a single account and stick to it.

Also, from piecing together the tortured English of your requests, I have to ask you to ask yourself if your English language skills are really what you would like them to be, and suggest you consider editing in your native-language Wikipedia instead. — Daniel Case (talk) 04:23, 22 July 2021 (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.

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).

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

---

Request reason:

Hi Daniel. Thank you for your reply - even if it was a rude reply. There are no rules about maintaining cordiality with other users, no? In fact, english isn't my native language and your comment sounded offensive. Anyway, I'm just communicating in english because my block was in english, as well as everyone who came in contact with me. And, just to make you feel safe and sound in your position as guardian of Wikipedia, the text I was trying to edit has been proofread before, okay? About the other part of your answer where you say "cannot be more crystal clear than it is", [following article] says "Alternative accounts have legitimate uses. For example, editors who contribute using their real name may wish to use a pseudonym for contributions with which they do not want their real name to be associated [MY CASES]...These accounts are not considered sockpuppets." Also, if you check out my edits you'll be sure none of them hurt any community policy.

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

• the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
• the block is no longer necessary because you
  1. understand what you have been blocked for,
  2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
  3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 19:59, 22 July 2021 (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.