Wiki Article
User talk:CGPPlay
Nguồn dữ liệu từ Wikipedia, hiển thị bởi DefZone.Net
Welcome!
[edit]Hi CGPPlay! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.
As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:
Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.
If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:
If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:
Happy editing! – LuniZunie ツ(talk) 22:11, 27 October 2025 (UTC)
October 2025
[edit]
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Eleventh Doctor have been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.
- ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
- If you need help, please see the Introduction to Wikipedia, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, place
{{Help me}}on your talk page and someone will drop by to help. - The following is the log entry regarding this message: Eleventh Doctor was changed by CGPPlay (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.875081 on 2025-10-27T23:14:55+00:00
Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 23:14, 27 October 2025 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Mario Kart Wii. Your edits continue to appear to constitute vandalism and have been automatically reverted.
- If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
- ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been considered as unconstructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
- If you need help, please see the Introduction to Wikipedia, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, place
{{Help me}}on your talk page and someone will drop by to help. - The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Mario Kart Wii was changed by CGPPlay (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.867912 on 2025-10-27T23:48:14+00:00
Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 23:48, 27 October 2025 (UTC)
Blocked for sockpuppetry
[edit]
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.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice:
{{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.
CGPPlay (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I am requesting to be unblocked because I have not used this account maliciously or disruptively and have always attempted to be constructive with my edits, and have not edited to compromise the quality of Wikipedia articles. I believe that there may have been a mistake with the range being blocked, and ultimately I do not believe this block would be beneficial for Wikipedia overall, and would like to make further constructive edits to improve the quality of articles. I apologise for any inconvenience that this request may potentially cause. CGPPlay (talk) 20:50, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Decline reason:
This does not address the reason for the block. Yamla (talk) 21:17, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
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.
CGPPlay (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I am requesting to be unblocked because I have been flagged as making multiple accounts and using them disruptively, which goes against Wikipedia's sockpuppet policy; I do not recall making these other accounts as listed on the investigations page and therefore I am not responsible for the disruptive edits of others, the device I am using is a shared device on a network with multiple users and other people so there may potentially be an issue with the detection of dynamic IP addresses, but I have not used this account improperly, and I am not the sockpuppet 'master' as stated in the investigations page. I believe this block will not benefit Wikipedia because I have not edited disruptively and have always endeavoured to contribute constructively in every edit I perform, and will continue to do so if unblocked. I have seen that being blocked has resulted in other users reverting some of my recent edits which are not disruptive due to this possible mistake, so I believe a block would not be helpful. Apologies, once more, for the inconvenience this request may cause other users. CGPPlay (talk) 21:41, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Checkuser verified abuser of multiple accounts. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇 23:44, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
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.
CGPPlay (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Apologies, once more, but I am contesting the conclusion of 'Checkuser verified abuser of multiple accounts'; this is because I have just found out that someone I know created these accounts on this device as listed in the sockpuppet investigation as part of a 'joke' after I forgot to log out of the device, and therefore I acknowledge that this device was likely responsible for the Checkuser detection tool showing a positive result. I have told them to stop it and they have agreed not to do so anymore after showing them that I was blocked from Wikipedia as a result of this ridiculous 'joke'. On this account, I have not edited disruptively or with malicious intent and I will once again re-iterate that I have, and will always attempt to edit Wikipedia properly, with constructive edits exclusively and the block will not be helpful since I genuinely do want to support the quality of the website, despite the actions of others. Therefore I am requesting to be unblocked, and that hopefully this incident can be closed, and I will always remember to log out before another person can use this device following this somewhat preventable incident. Thank you, and apologies for this request, which I hope to be final. CGPPlay (talk)
Decline reason:
Aha, a new variation on the theme of my little brother did it – "someone I know who has access to my device did it"! Sorry, but I don't buy that. Besides, if someone else did have access to your device for several days without you even realising it, then clearly your security is so lax that it wouldn't be safe for us to unblock you. DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:53, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
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.
A way forward
[edit]@DoubleGrazing I have read your reply and the essay that you have attached and I acknowledge that the reason is a common excuse and that it likely would decrease the credibility of this account (even though this incident did occur; I should be more clear and say that I share this device with other known contacts (not a little brother, but the essay made clear that did this not matter), and that security is not an issue, although ultimately it should have been preventable)). Therefore, can you potentially suggest a way for this account to be unblocked (the other sockpuppet accounts can remained blocked and will not be accessed again); I have read policies regarding the opportunity to start again and having 'one last chance', although this would not apply to 'sockpuppet' incidents and this account would not be eligible for that policy, therefore are there any alternatives to this because I still do want to contribute constructively to Wikipedia despite the actions of others unfortunately (and yes, you may still not believe this and this is a valid argument (no-one on the Internet can see who is using the device etc.) even though it actually occurred, really) and believe that a block, especially of indefinite length would not be constructive. Apologies for the inconvenience this reply may have. @Inzo As the blocking administrator, I would like to ask if you could provide some advice to come to a resolution; apologies for this message.
- Your explanation does not match the technical evidence. Therefore, there's no path forward for you with this explanation. --Yamla (talk) 12:49, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
- @Yamla Thank you for your response; I do agree that the Checkuser technical evidence does suggest that this account would be responsible for the creation of sockpuppets (and this is what you would believe justifiably); but I will re-iterate that the device used is shared, therefore the dynamic IP range as detected through Checkuser would likely be identical; therefore I would like to consult for any advice to come to a resolution as I do want to meaningfully contribute to Wikipedia. I apologise if this is wrong because I do not have knowledge of how Checkuser actually works but would be thankful for a response, even if you do not agree with my points, and provide advice on how to solve this. CGPPlay (talk) 13:00, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
- Given that explanation, I see no path forward for you. Please do not ping me again. --Yamla (talk) 13:08, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
- I am really sorry for this reply, and that this is likely to result in another notification that you did not want. Yes, this incident has been terrible and I should probably get over it and the evidence shows that this account should not be trusted and I acknowledge that the explanation that you are likely to want is that this account is an admission that this account is a 'sockpuppet' master which goes against WP:SOCK and a full apology for the disruption caused by the other accounts and not be the classic excuse of 'my little brother did it'.
- Therefore I will apologise, that the sockpuppets could have been prevented and that I became aware of the situation much sooner than a few days, and that I saw the person I share this device with perform the disruptive mass move requests as outlined in the sockpuppet investigation and I did advise them to stop and they said that it wouldn't affect my account so I let them off, and I really should have been stricter with them instead of ignoring it, which would be an implicit sign of permitting them to continue and this did continue for a few days with a false sense of security.
- With my earlier unblock requests, I do admit that there seems to be a contradiction with 'being unaware' of the other accounts but I panicked as a result of seeing my account get blocked suddenly, and I apologise for compromising this account's credibility with the multiple unblock requests with vague details and the inconvenience that the unblock requests have to administrators by not getting to the point.
- Yes, I do admit this seems like a complex version of the excuse above and that the likely administrator verdict is either to classify this as trolling or a message to stop because 'Wikipedia is not about winning' and that the Checkuser technical evidence suggests that this is a sockpuppet 'master' and coincidences should not be accepted, because faking this incident is much, much easier than it actually happening, and I highly agree with this point.
- Therefore, clearly this is not enough but I will not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point; what concerns me is that I could make another account in the future due to ever-changing-dynamic IP addresses which would bypass auto-blocks and make constructive edits, forgetting about this incident but I know that method, even done with good faith, would be a blatant violation of the sockpuppet and block evasion policies and that is why I am so insistent in getting this account unblocked and will therefore say that I am really, really, really sorry for all of these accounts and will nevertheless accept full responsibility of all the actions on this device.
- Doing this just through typing is very difficult when the evidence is rightfully against you and I do accept that this account can be viably justified as the 'sockpuppet' master and that an indefinite block seems to be a reasonable verdict, and if there is no resolution I must accept that this account will be blocked permanently.
- I am relatively new to editing Wikipedia constructively with a registered account as evidenced through this account and I do accept that I have made mistakes, from accidentally reverting to a past edition but especially and regretfully with the sockpuppet incident, and even when editing constructively I will admit that I may not always get it right immediately, however, I hope that through practice I will be able to contribute constructively to Wikipedia overall, no matter how occasionally or frequently I may edit in the future; after all, I really shouldn't take Wikipedia editing too seriously and that Wikipedia editing is not meant to be a stressful task.
- And yes, you may still think this explanation is still insufficient and that there may really be 'no path forward' for me, and accept that this may still very well be the case but I will re-iterate that I am extremely sorry for the presence of every single one of those 'sockpuppet' accounts and I would not mind, and actually would want all of those accounts to remain blocked, to serve as a reminder that it is possible to learn, even from the most disruptive incidents. I will state again that irrespective of the complexity of the incident, have taken full accountability for those accounts and that yes, these are sockpuppet accounts of this account, as evidenced and confirmed through Checkuser and its corresponding technical evidence; but I am willing to learn from this experience as shown by not trying to create further accounts and attempting to exclusively properly reply with this account.
- Ultimately, I am only requesting for this account to be unblocked and that the other accounts should remain blocked; I have not disruptively edited on this account therefore I believe this would be the best account to potentially facilitate constructive edits going forward, unless there is an alternative provision available which I am not aware of.
- Yet again, I apologise for the sockpuppet accounts and (I know how unreliable this claim is, but I'll say it anyways) this will not happen again and that if there are further sockpuppets linked to this account, I will accept that this account can be blocked permanently and will not try any further.
- I apologise for this very long comment, and perhaps that I probably should stop insisting but I really and genuinely hope that a resolution can be reached. CGPPlay (talk) 14:25, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
- Given that explanation, I see no path forward for you. Please do not ping me again. --Yamla (talk) 13:08, 2 November 2025 (UTC)