User talk:User26016458780D9F0FE9D

January 2022[change source]

We like and strongly encourage helpful changes to Wikipedia, but "J Church" was directly copied and pasted from the main English Wikipedia. Please do not do that. Such articles are usually too complex. They need to be simplified before or immediately after being added to the Simple English Wikipedia. In addition, be sure to include attribution on the article's talk page. Thank you. MathXplore (talk) 05:44, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from changing Wikipedia in line with Wikipedia's blocking policy for abusing multiple accounts. If you think this block is unfair, you may ask to be unblocked by adding {{unblock|your reason here}} below. If you cannot do this or the reason is private, please send an e-mail to simple-admins-l@lists.wikimedia.org and an administrator will look at your reason and reply. You may want to read our guide to unblock requests before asking to be unblocked. --Ferien (talk) 16:25, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This blocked user asked to be unblocked, but one or more administrators said no to this unblock request. Other administrators can also review this block, but should not unblock the user without a good reason. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

User26016458780D9F0FE9D (contribs · deleted contribs · block log · filter log · global contribs)

Request reason:

Used ImprovingSimpleWiki, but not for abuse. I got blocked without violating the one-strike rule by BRPever. This sysop likely blocked me because when I was given the one-strike, that sysop probably knew I was gonna make an error, so they instantly blocked me. I know this because I have review my edits from my first account here on Simple and none of them violated any rules here on Simple.[1] This sysop was likely worried that I was going to do something wrong. In conclusion, I this block is unfair. --User26016458780D9F0FE9D (talk) 16:50, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Decline reason:

A request for unblock has already been declined recently, and the answer is the same. As on the English Wikipedia, competence is required to edit here. Continuing the same behaviour as on the English Wikipedia is a violation of our one strike policy. A review of your edits shows some very strange behaviour. Requesting adminship immediately is a huge question of competence and understanding, and your other edits aren't much better. For example, this revert on the sandbox, where you stated "this isn't the place to test" is highly unusual, as the sandbox is one of the only places to test. In all, the block is appropriate, and it will stand. Continuing to block evade is not going to help you get back any time soon. -- Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 23:43, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I won't review this as I made the block myself, but ONESTRIKE definitely applied for the ImprovingSimpleWiki account. You were being disruptive in many ways, all are addressed on your talk page, but you never appeared to listen to the issues addressed there. And now, you are still being disruptive by evading that block and global lock that was placed on that account. Even if you believe the block was unfair, you should not be evading it, as you definitely have been here. --Ferien (talk) 16:54, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be back when my block expires. Thanks, it has been fun talking to you since the beginning. User26016458780D9F0FE9D (talk) 01:26, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your block here doesn't expire, and if it did, then the sockpuppetry would make it indefinite. Please take a break (without block evading via IP as you continued to do after you sent the message below) and maybe you can come back in the future. Thanks. --Ferien (talk) 20:19, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, alright, I will end my evasion. Nice meeting you! User26016458780D9F0FE9D (talk) 01:27, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]