User talk:Ramny

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).

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

Request reason:

I added just one reference to the page Madhesh. Additionally, I helped wikipedia administrator to bring attention to the vandalism of the page. I noticed the advisory message of Ponyo in response. Will follow the advise. Is there anything else I can do to get unblocked?

Decline reason:

You are blocked for WP:sockpuppetry using User:Madheshi123 and User:Themiddlecountry accounts. You have to explain that. Vanjagenije (talk) 13:00, 17 July 2017 (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 is a checkuser block, so this will require a checkuser to comment on. RickinBaltimore (talk) 12:47, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

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

Request reason:

This is additional response. I reviewed the comment from User:Vanjagenije. I am passive reader of wikipedia 99.99% of the time. Once I wanted to update a page and wanted to try with user ID, thus created Ramny almost 3 years back. And in 3 years, I almost forgot about it. Last week few users noted vandalism on page Madhesh and shared their experience on a google group. I felt bad for vandalism and wanted to promote reliable information on the page (by adding references). Thus, desired to create a wikipedia user-ID 'Themiddlecountry' (since I have forgotten about ID Ramny). However, while sending the user ID credential, wikipedia sent me two emails, one each for each ID. That's when I remembered Ramny, and preferred to reuse old ID. I don't know person behind User:Madheshi123. And I haven't used User:Themiddlecountry for anything so far. Let me know if you need more information to help you reactive my ID.

Accept reason:

I accept your explanation of your relation with User:Themiddlecountry. That account must now be abandoned. Neither the behavioural nor technical evidence convincingly link you to User:Madheshi123. I am therefore giving you the benefit of the doubt and unblocking you. Please bear in mind that if there are any future suggestions of abusing multiple accounts then you would be immediately reblocked. Happy editing and I look forward to your contributions. Just Chilling (talk) 20:48, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbb23: I note that the User:Madheshi123 account was created before Ramny was blocked so it was not made for block evasion. Is there technical evidence confirming the sock relationship? If so then endof. However, if there is not then I am inclined to give the benefit of the doubt and request the checkuserblock element be removed. Just Chilling (talk) 02:47, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Just Chilling: Bbb23 blocked Madheshi123 with a "checkuser block" and tagged their user page with a tag that says "This account has been confirmed by a CheckUser as a sock puppet of Ramny" [1]. So, I guess there is technical evidence confirming the sock relationship. Vanjagenije (talk) 15:02, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Vanjagenije and Bbb23: The notice also says "the operator has abusively used multiple accounts" and I am not seeing the abusive use. I would still like the checkuserblock removed or hear from Bbb23 what I am missing. Just Chilling (talk) 17:40, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Just Chilling: Using two accounts to edit the same page is disruptive per WP:ILLEGIT. Vanjagenije (talk) 21:58, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Checkuser note: The connection between Ramny and Middlecountry is very clear (as one would expect, given Ramny's statement above. In terms of a connection with Madheshi123, the two accounts use the same ISP (but not IP address), geolocate to the same area, and have the same useragent data. Against that, I would add that the ISP is a very popular one in their country, with well over 100 million subscribers, and the useragent data suggests a very common PC setup. On balance, my personal opinion is that the reviewing administrator should not attach too much weight to the technical evidence in this case. Yunshui ^雲 _水 12:23, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]