User talk:Neville Howard

Welcome!

Hello, Neville Howard! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! — Masum Ibn Musa ^Conversation 14:31, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Started
Contributing to Wikipedia • Tutorial • Your first article The five pillars of Wikipedia • Simplified ruleset How to: edit a page • upload an image
Getting Help
Frequently Asked Questions Directories and indexes Where to: ask questions • make requests Tip of the day Request administrator attention
Policies and Guidelines
Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style (Simplified) • Three-revert rule Copyrights • Non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sock puppetry Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community
Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump IRC channels • Mailing lists The Signpost (Wikipedia's newspaper)
Things to do
Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism
Miscellaneous
Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

November 2018

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Disappearance of Suzy Lamplugh, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Please do not include obscene words in articles, when not mentioned in reference. Thank you. David J Johnson (talk) 12:15, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.

TonyBallioni (talk) 15:31, 14 November 2018 (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).

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

Request reason:

I apologise unreservedly for the unconstructive edit I made to Disappearance_of_Suzy_Lamplugh. I wholly accept that it was inappropriate and will not use such language again. I offer no mitigation and totally accept responsibility for my actions. Thank you for considering this appeal. Don't hesitate to contact me on here if you require any further information. Kind regards, Neville. Neville Howard (talk) 12:56, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You have not addressed your violation of WP:SOCK Yamla (talk) 13:02, 19 November 2018 (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).

Neville Howard (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 feedback. I appreciate that I should have broached the sock-puppet issue, so I will do now. I will try to keep it as brief as possible but a bit of explanation is required. Thank you in advance for your patience in reading this.

Editors of an article about this school (my alma mater) were debating on its talk page about how to deal with recent and high-profile cases before the courts involving allegations of - and convictions for - rape and sexual abuse committed by teachers against pupils. As of November 2018, five teachers have been convicted, one is awaiting trial, and police indicate that further arrests can be expected. This case made national news, and it was agreed that it deserved at least a mention on the Wikipedia article. Reliable sources were used and a great job was done by many different editors to ensure that the utmost care and sensitivity was exercised in describing the case. Only reliable sources were used, the presumption of innocence was paramount, and a neutral POV prevailed, sticking simply to the facts.

However, one user was persistently deleting all mentions of the abuse cases. Multiple editors repeatedly revoked these changes and told the user concerned to stop arbitrarily mass-deleting relevant and important parts of the article. The user responded that they felt having the information on Wikipedia would "make the school look bad" and that it was more important to "protect the good name" of the school than it was to put these events on Wikipedia. According to that logic, perhaps People v. Turner should be deleted in case it makes his faculty look bad, or Ted Bundy should be deleted in case his relatives don't like it being out there.

Clearly, the reason for deleting this relevant, neutral and concise section about the recent abuse cases was invalid. I am good friends with one of the victims in this case. Without going into detail, their life has been ruined as a result of being sexually assaulted by their teacher over a period of several years. I was unaware of the abuse at the time, and when I became aware of it, I was devastated at not being able to help my friend at the time. Thus, I felt it was unacceptable for the editor to brush this issue under the carpet, so I wrote a strongly worded, yes offensive comment, on their talk page. I was quickly told that I went too far, and I immediately apologised unreservedly and accepted my mistake. The matter was closed.

Several months later, my user account was banned after I made a foolish and puerile edit. I was not banned for this specific edit but rather, an admin used my rant (see above paragraph) as proof that I was a "horrible person", in their own words. This rant was unacceptable, inexcusable and I apologised immediately and unreservedly as soon as the objection had been brought to my attention. The admin ignored the context behind the rant, where I was berating someone for sweeping under the carpet extremely serious crimes perpetrated by men who taught me and abused at least one of my friends.

So I then committed the sock puppet faux-pas and created this username. I offer no mitigation for this. My motive at the time was frustration at being banned for objecting strongly to the minimisation of the sexual abuse of children.

Separately, I would like to take this opportunity to illustrate my usefulness to Wikipedia by highlighting the articles that I have created, either from scratch or from translating from the French or German Wikipedia. And of course I have made constructive edits large and small to countless other articles. I hope that this will show you that I am a serious user who is sorry for their mistakes:

Thank you in advance for considering my request.

Regards, --Neville Howard (talk) 14:17, 27 November 2018 (UTC) Neville Howard (talk) 14:17, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You will need to request unblock from your original account (the one whose most recent is this.) --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇} 14:37, 27 November 2018 (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.