User talk:Juanfranciscoposse

January 2019[edit]

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:45, 19 January 2019 (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).

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

Request reason:

Your reason here Please unblock me. I have no bad intentions. I have just deleted some comments that were mine and blanked my talk page. I need to do stuff at the Wikipedia and I can't do them because of this. Please unblock me.

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:10, 20 January 2019 (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).

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

Request reason:

Your reason here I fully understand everything. From now onwards, I won't do anything that is wrong nor delete messages, and try to do as you tell me. Is it alright?

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 13:14, 20 January 2019 (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.

Read the block message. The block is for sockpuppetry, which is the misuse of multiple accounts, and you have not even mentioned that in this request. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:11, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You are not permitted to blank declines for current blocks. Do not do so again. --Yamla (talk) 17:56, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yamla's statement above was crystal clear, but in this edit you again blanked the declines. If you do so again, it is likely that your block will be modified to remove your ability to edit this talk page. - David Biddulph (talk) 21:32, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock.[edit]

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).

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

Request reason:

Sorry for everything. I have just deleted some comments that were mine and blanked my talk page. That is all. And about the use of multiple accounts, I have created another one because I have realized that I can't be using my real name here. All of my accounts are unknowncontributor321, samsungx635, juanfranciscoposse and supercontributor. I've created many because there was always something that happened (forgot the password, can't log in anymore, etc) This block is a huge misunderstanding. I'm not a bad guy who wants to mess up the Wikipedia. I have just deleted some comments that were mine, blanked my talk page and have multiple accounts for a good reason. Please discuss with the other admins to unblock me right away.

Decline reason:

Only one unblock request at a time is needed. I will leave the request below active, and close this one. SQL ^{Query me!} 05:57, 22 January 2019 (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.

Unblock.[edit]

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).

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

Request reason:

Sorry for saying this, but I need quick answers people. I was too excited to apport something to the Wikipedia and you suddenly blocked me.

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you

understand what you have been blocked for,
will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information.

Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 21:44, 23 January 2019 (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.

Here, I told you to stop making multiple unblock requests because it just slows the process and wastes time. I also indicated it was unlikely we'd unblock this account any time soon, given that you set it up to evade a block on your original account. As such, I've revoked your access to this talk page. Another admin will be along shortly to review your request. They may choose to reinstate your talk page access at that time. Otherwise, you will likely have to follow WP:SO which requires at least six months with zero edits. --Yamla (talk) 22:08, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Six month timer reset. --Yamla (talk) 22:07, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Six month timer reset again, with User talk:186.137.218.201 editing. 331dot (talk) 12:32, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And again. --Yamla (talk) 17:48, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Once more, with User talk:200.80.247.35. 331dot (talk) 15:30, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Because of the use of an IP address for a UTRS appeal, which constitutes block evasion, the SO timer is reset to 3 October 2019. Just Chilling (talk) 14:59, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Now reset to the 7th of October. 331dot (talk) 10:50, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

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

UTRS appeal #24532 was submitted on Mar 31, 2019 21:12:35. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 21:12, 31 March 2019 (UTC) [reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

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

UTRS appeal #24533 was submitted on Mar 31, 2019 21:54:54. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 21:54, 31 March 2019 (UTC) [reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

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

UTRS appeal #24535 was submitted on Mar 31, 2019 22:20:31. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 22:20, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]