User talk:ManoelWild

Welcome!

Hello, ManoelWild, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

Introduction
The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
How to write a great article
Simplified Manual of Style
Your first article
Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.

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 need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! Randykitty (talk) 17:07, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

February 2023

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sockpuppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 04:56, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is wrong!

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).

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

Request reason:

This is wrong! All I did was edit a new article about a publication in my country. I'm not anyone's puppet! ManoelWild (talk) 06:46, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Simple denial is insufficient. Yamla (talk) 10:56, 21 February 2023 (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).

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

Request reason:

I have constructively countered vandalism on Wikipedia and added important information from Krytyka Polityczna to a new article. I have done nothing wrong here, I'm not anyone's puppet. I am editing from Poland and that new article on the Polish publication caught my eye. ManoelWild (talk) 17:14, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This is still just a denial. 331dot (talk) 10:25, 23 February 2023 (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).

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

Request reason:

The block imposed was not necessary to prevent damage or disruption and violates the Wikipedia Wikipedia:Blocking policy. I'm my own person and nobody's puppet. I've added meticulously researched information from a good Polish source to a new article. This is not the act of some malicious puppet, I am well meaning here. This is horribly wrong, why are you horrendously violating the Wikipedia blocking policy by blocking well meaning contributions? ManoelWild (talk) 13:27, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

No response to below in over two months. — Daniel Case (talk) 04:13, 29 April 2023 (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.

I'm not reviewing this, but this is yet another denial. Every sock puppet denies being one, since that is the whole point. Many of them also make good edits. If there is an error here, you will need to do better than just deny socking. It could also be that this is not sock puppetry but meat puppetry. 331dot (talk) 20:46, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]