User talk:Plotogate3-7

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.

--Blablubbs (talk) 14:09, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For further appeal:

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).

Plotogate3-7 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have a reason for a simple unblock, Blablubbs has decided to perform a check on me without a good reason and managed to link other accounts, when in fact, those all accounts are not the person and these never belong to me. Did I even get reported at SPI or through email? For a reason, I got blocked for not here to build an encyclopedia behavior, when in fact, I was already improving an encyclopedia with my own contributions. Can you please give me advice on how to appeal block successfully, and how to make useful contributions in the near future? I really don’t want these accounts to be linked by a checkuser and I don’t want any sockpuppet accusations to happen earlier in the year too. How did the checkuser know that I was suspected socking and how did the CU managed to get other accounts without behavioral evaluation? And did someone reported me before I was blocked by a checkuser? And could other accounts be unblocked before me, since they are different people with unique personalities? Thank you for responding to my block appeal. Plotogate3-7 (talk) 17:49, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This is incoherent. Yamla (talk) 19:30, 4 February 2024 (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.

Question for administrator

Hello administrators, while you mostly aren’t checkusers, could you please help explain why would Blablubbs decided to run a checkuser on me without my consent just to both verify and confirm that I am an abuser of multiple accounts? Sure thing that these accounts are created from the same IP address of range possibly, but checkuser has decided to link these other unrelated accounts to my account listed in block log. However, I am a new user recently registered, so I am unable to edit Wikipedia further, even though I made an add small amount of edit typically 3-10 edits at a time. For me, I do not really believe that these accounts belong to me as a person, instead, those 5 other accounts are actually different people with different perspectives. So these 5 other people never got a chance to edit Wikipedia longer since they were accused of being sockpuppets of me, when in reality, I am not controlling 5 other accounts. So in terms of that, would you look at the comments I made at Teahouse? How did the checkuser knew that I am abusing multiple accounts and being a sockpuppet, when in fact, they are authentic accounts used by independently owned individuals? Could an checkuser know that if I am ready to edit Wikipedia after 6 months passed by? I do not want to be accused of socking. Thanks again.

--Plotogate3-7 (talk) 03:25, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your talk page access is purely to appeal your block, not to ask questions of the admins. PhilKnight (talk) 05:21, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]