User talk:OhioJack

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).

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

Request reason:

Why have I been blocked for no reason?? I have only contributed to Wikipedia and have never done anything to be blocked!

Decline reason:

See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/1wikideb1. You were blocked because a CheckUser found that you're the same person as 1wikideb1/Robedia. If this is in fact not the case, please open a new unblock request explaining why not. Jackmcbarn (talk) 01:36, 19 November 2014 (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).

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

Request reason:

This is absurd. On what basis have I been associated with these other accounts? It could well be possible that somebody has been using my IP. This is insane. As you can see, I have only tried to improve articles and have never made any damaging edits! I have even received a "barnstar" for having spotted a hoax article.OhioJack (talk) 04:21, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

The checkuser said that all of the accounts are "technically indistinguishable" from each other. This means that all of those accounts would have had to share a lot more than just the same IP address. Are there a dozen people sharing the same IP address as you, who also use the same browser that you do, and have the same screen resolution as you do, have the exact same fonts installed, and actually use the exact same computer that you do? That would be an awfully unlikely coincidence. It is quite easy to track unique visitors to a website, even if they are jumping to different IP addresses. See https://panopticlick.eff.org/ for an example of the type of information that can be used to identify you as a unique user. There is virtually no chance that all of the accounts in the sockpuppet investigation just happen to have all of the same identifying information as you, by dumb luck. ‑Scottywong | confess _ 05:15, 19 November 2014 (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.

Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, OhioJack! Thank you for your contributions. I am Flat Out and I have been editing Wikipedia for some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{help me}} at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Flat Out let's discuss it 10:16, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	I award you this barnstar for detecting a hoax and bringing it to attention at The Teahouse. You did the right thing. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:30, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for giving a barnstar! I will certainly keep a lookout for editors of these hoaxes/fraudulent articles.--OhioJack (talk) 05:32, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Cullen328, Could you please help me as I have been blocked for no reason? Thanks--OhioJack (talk) 22:39, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Joseph DiLorenzo for deletion

I am in the process of completing a nomination that you started, but you didn't indicate why you think that the article should be deleted. Normally when an article is tagged for deletion with no reason given, the tag is simply removed and the page is kept, but I am somewhat in favour of deleting the page myself so I am completing the nomination anyway. If you would like to, please add your comments to the articles for deletion page. Cheers! Ivanvector (talk) 14:01, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted your AfD attempt on Genesis Be, as you added a broken AfDm, and never added a reason nor (attempted to) log it. I can see your reasoning, but I believe they still meet WP:BAND, as was determined at the first AfD. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 20:20, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Cullen328, Could you please help me as I have been blocked for no reason? Thanks--OhioJack (talk) 22:39, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I can't help you, OhioJack, since I am neither an administrator nor a checkuser. You have been blocked based on specific evidence, not for "no reason". The best thing you can do is to tell the truth, in detail, offering an explanation of the behavioral and technical evidence that you are a sockpuppet account. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:03, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]