User talk:Arthur Kerensa

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Notice: This user was previously known as User:A Den Jentyl Ettien Avel Dysklyver.
List of my alternative accounts. See also my meta log for more.

I need your help in labeling![change source]

ORES needs many edits to be classified, so please go here to help. Thank's, Adotchar| reply here 22:46, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

IP Disruption[change source]

See this request here. RickinBaltimore (talk) 15:58, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

thanks. Arthur Kerensa (talk) 16:20, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Help re block[change source]

  • @Eptalon: Hi, Eptalon, I have just been blocked by Djsasso for "(Abusing several accounts)", It is a known fact this a replacement account, I even told the CU people on en-wiki about this - perhaps I should have told you guys too. I was previously User:A Den Jentyl Ettien Avel Dysklyver. Another account related to me (but in fact belonging to my sister) is User:Emblyn Kerensa. I think it is unlikely that my editing could be regarded as "abusing" multiple accounts, I have done useful edits, no bad things and indeed most my work has been on the list of places in Cornwall, so could you either get me unblocked or give some clarification on this. I am on IRC as "Dysklyver" if you want to chat about this. Thanks. Arthur Kerensa (talk) 22:30, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hello there; I am not familiar with your situation, but I generally trust DJSasso, he is a good admin/bureaucrat; We can discuss whether we need the list of Places in Cornwall (This is a small wiki, and likely, they will remain red-links; other than that I see some anti-vandalsim work in the last 1-1.5 days. Write to the admins list if you feel like DJSasso treated you unfairly. He might have run a checkuser, and found you having several accounts you use for different purposes (Thats what "abusing several accounts" usually means). I'll have a look, probably later in the week, but cannot give any guarantees... --Eptalon (talk) 22:39, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Eptalon: Ok thanks, I am not having a go at DJSasso, his actions were understandable given that I do have more than one account (but not used concurrently or for different purposes), and if he thought that list was unsuitable it would make sense to block me after a CU. I would just like someone to look into it given that I don't think that I should be blocked here given the circumstances. I will work on said list offline, perhaps I could let someone more experienced have a look at it as a userspace draft before going for mainspace again? I look forward to this block being dealt with. Arthur Kerensa (talk) 22:48, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request reason(s):
At the risk of plugging a "bad unblock request" by saying "I am innocent, honest", here is a request for you to please unblock me. As explained above, I have not been "abusing" multiple accounts, I just have more than one. This is allowed, but I apologise for not making this clearer beforehand. I have not broken the WP:SOCK rules. For clarity please note that I stopped using User:A Den Jentyl Ettien Avel Dysklyver on 28 November 2017 and have not edited with it since creating and starting to use this one. (except for this bot test failure 4 days later). All that said, I am sorry I didn't make this clearer, its very difficult to see the link between my accounts unless you look in the account creation log on meta or my talk page on en-wiki, and that is not really good enough. I am not particularly bothered if you unblock my old account or not (but update the block reason please if it remains blocked). Finally as it is likely to influence your opinion, please note that I am blocked per WP:CIR on en-wiki, details on my talk page there. Arthur Kerensa (talk) 5:29 am, 19 December 2017, Tuesday (10 days ago) (UTC−5)

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):
Unblocked by User:Eptalon. Welcome back. (non-admin closure) —Glendales 16:46, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I would point out, it might be known on other wikis but it wasn't declared here as is required, and you were using it on the same pages you had used the other account on which is a violation. Secondly even without the sockpuppeting, you are having the same issues here that you had on en.wiki which would make this a very valid WP:ONESTRIKE block (which I should note did also enter into my decision making). Either way it was a valid block. The changing of the Cornwall article was a separate issue completely. And now reading your your unblock request you mention a bot failure. You shouldn't be using a bot on either of your accounts, that alone as well is a valid block reason. -DJSasso (talk) 15:47, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]


@Djsasso: I understand what you are saying, but I argue.
  • WP:ONESTRIKE requires me to have broken the rules on the Simple English Wikipedia, which I have not.
  • The issues I had on enwiki have not occurred here, you don't have an ArbCom election for me to stand in and you don't have an extended AfD process for me to make "frivolous nominations" to. It is almost impossible for me to repeat the WP:CIR issues I had there and I have not done so.
  • My new account and my use of it is consistent with WP:Sock, you say that I cannot continue to edit a page I created with my previous account, unfortunately I was not aware of this as it is not stated in the policy.
  • You say that ONESTRIKE was part of your block reasoning, therefore you should have seen my alternative account declaration, the link in the block log confirming that, and the confirmation and subsequent discussion on my talk page which was also linked from the block log.
  • I don't habitually use bots, the error I noted was an edit intended to be on the test-wiki, and was part of testing the configuration of an anti-vandalism package. You say that using a bot is block reason, but my understanding is that it must actually either make unsupervised or disruptive edits to fall into that remit.
Obviously my stance is that I ought to be unblocked, I hope you can see my point of view, which is that this was not anticipated and came as rather a shock given that the people here had previously been quite welcoming. (I am still on IRC). Arthur Kerensa (talk) 16:16, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Onestrike just requires you to show the same behavior you did on the other wiki. In this case it would be a competence issue. We don't have the specific incidents themselves obviously, but the underlying issue of competence can still be present without the actual events being the same. Linking directly to enwiki articles and wikidata they way you did to use your Cornwall article for example is just something common sense should have told you was not appropriate. As far as two accounts go we still require you to indicate you have an alternate account, not everyone here goes to other wikis so it can easily be assumed you were hiding your identity here. In fact I believe stewards at meta even told you that you should continue using the other account until that block was settled. Using a bot period would be a block here, I understand it was an accident, and I obviously didn't block you for it as I didn't know about it until your message above. I was just pointing out if you had been using it here in any manner it would be blockable the minute you made an edit. -DJSasso (talk) 17:39, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
But linking to en and wd was very useful for building the entries. That was most certainly not a finished list, eventually it will look like the "A" section did (image, article, native name, type -etc with refs). All the entries on the list have articles on the complicated wikipedia, some of which I made, and no doubt that will happen here too eventually (especially if I do it). I can do the list without the en & wd links if you like? I will copy over my alternative accounts list as that seems pertinent too. The matter regarding my new account has been brought to the stewards already. @Djsasso: Can you please unblock me? Arthur Kerensa (talk) 21:03, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ok thanks, I actually thought you would be reviewing the block (hence me endlessly pinging you - clearly not needed), but have no problem with someone else doing it, although it would be nice if this happened soon. Arthur Kerensa (talk) 00:19, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unblocked...[change source]

Hello Arthur Kerensa, I have looked at the situation, and decided to unblock you. Please adhere to the following rules:

  • This account (Arthur Kerensa) is not used for any bot-related activity. Operating a bot means that a separate account is used for bot operation. There is also a procedure of getting a bot approved to operate on this wiki.
  • Note that special rules also apply for using tools such as AWB.
  • Having multiple accounts is generally no issue, if you don't try to hide this fact, and do not abuse them. Given your history, it would be nice if you told us about them.
  • Please follow the rules; admins are free to re-block if they see that you don't.

Other than that, welcome here, and have fun editing. --Eptalon (talk) 16:53, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Arthur_Kerensa&oldid=5930552"