Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Sanctioned Suicide, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 09:15, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Sanctioned Suicide, you may be blocked from editing. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 09:21, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits fail style guidelines tremendously. Take it to the talk page. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 09:22, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Sanctioned Suicide. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 09:23, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote almost the entire article FYI 72.86.42.248 (talk) 09:24, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for block evasion.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Bbb23 (talk) 14:01, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks for block evasion.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Bbb23 (talk) 22:39, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 6 months for block evasion.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Drmies (talk) 21:29, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 year for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Willwill0415 per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Willwill0415. 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. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 18:27, 5 April 2024 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

No reason given for any blocks other than hand waving or lies 72.86.42.248 (talk) 20:04, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This isn't a denial, let alone a plausible denial. Yamla (talk) 20:08, 12 April 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.

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I'd also like to add that I've been allowed, by top administrators, to write (and keep my writing) for this site in mainspace way more than before any blocks, while also knowing my identity. So that part doesn't make any sense. Before any blocks they would hardly let me get a sentence in anywhere there was controversy. Just another messed up thing

Decline reason:

Confirmed socking by a CU. You must appeal your global ban. — JJMC89 (T·C) 01:05, 13 April 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.

 Confirmed to a blocked account. As is standard in such cases, no comment as to which specific account. Regardless, it is inappropriate for you to make your request here. You should withdraw it and go and make the request from your account. If your account does not have talk page access, WP:UTRS is available to you. If you've had UTRS access revoked, that's basically the end of the line. I make no comment as to whether any of that applies, except the part about you having a blocked account. --Yamla (talk) 20:15, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, an IP cannot be a sockpuppet if I abide by the ban length and don't use another IP, I've never purposefully changed IPs to write for this site. I abided by the length of time of the last block. The only global block was based on mistaking me for someone who is now dead, ie not me. 72.86.42.248 (talk) 20:17, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is false. See WP:LOUTSOCK. --Yamla (talk) 20:19, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've never seen anyone claim that using a regular clear-net IP constitutes a sockpuppet. They said I was an "obvious sock", there's no such thing. An "obvious sock" is not a sock. Additionally it is true that the more global ban was based on (purposefully?) mistaking me for someone who is now dead. 72.86.42.248 (talk) 20:21, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have  Confirmed sockpuppetry in this case. Completely unambiguous. Take down your unblock request here and request using your original account. --Yamla (talk) 20:22, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yamla, if you used (and published) your clearnet, regular IP on my website I would not call you a sockpuppet, that would be deranged. Same goes for anyone. If someone doesn't want to be identified, the last thing they use is a regular clearnet IP. If I wanted to not be identified I would have used my computer in a library, or through an IP tunnel or something. 72.86.42.248 (talk) 20:23, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But back to the unblock thing, going by what I've experienced, being nominally blocked seems to confer a willingness to have me write for this site. As like I said before, they allowed me to write many, many mainspace paragraphs after blocks (and while knowing my identity) compared to being a regular joe shmoe on this site, when they would only allow me to write a few sentences on controversial pages. They've purposefully kept my aforementioned mainspace writing for years as valued parts of articles, including to this day, and there was little to no reason given for reverting what small amount was ever reverted. My content contribution has never been an issue here, they (some admins generally) seem to have a personal issue with me which they've never elaborated on. And both times they knew my identity, including while writing for heavily patrolled pages, there was never any debate about it except to lie I'm someone who is now dead to exact larger blocks. Additionally, none of my writing has been vandalism or uncivil ever on this site. There's people who wikipedia has let purposefully vandalize the site for years, before giving them authority or even expanded writing permissions as a "reformed editor". I started off a good editor and never vandalized the site so I don't see why I'm given worse treatment than long-term vandals. They're just skipping right to the nonsense blocks for no reason. I would at least like an apology from someone for blocking me by pretending I am someone who is now dead. It would be appreciated. 72.86.42.248 (talk) 20:37, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They blocked me initially as a "white supremacist", when there was 0 evidence of such. Then they blocked me as "nathan larson", a gross person who is now dead and who I've been vocally against. Then they blocked me as "Lamarcus Small", another gross person I've very been vocally against. I can't be the former because he is dead. I can't be the latter because he lives in Alabama, as is reported in the news. Some people do know my identity I think but still no reason has been given for blocking that identity other than hand waves or lies, even considering every single correspondence on here. 72.86.42.248 (talk) 20:55, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]