User talk:Ruffenready

January 2017

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Guy (Help!) 18:53, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I have been accused of being a sockpuppet for "Carlos Danger" after I proposed, in the Talk section, a small edit to the article about Mr. Rex Tillerson. I had requested that someone else make the edit because I was already blocked for some unexplained reason. That proposed edit was subsequently modified and then executed by another editor. My user name, Ruffenready, was created in 2007. I have not been very active in the editing arena. I think the only time was in the summer of 2012, and was related to the article on the Affordable Care Act. To provide proof of my actual existence and no relation to Carlos Danger, I have tried to search on edits made by Ruffenready to that article, and there are no results found. Do edits "expire" after a period of time, or after they no longer affect the content of the article? If this issue is resolved, there may still be an issue with the original, unexplained "block" which I became aware of only when I tried to make this most recent edit. If that is still in place, I would like to know what it relates to, so it can be resolved. Thanks. Tom Newcomb Ruffenready (talk) 05:43, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Decline reason:

I am declining this unblock request solely on the grounds that it has sat open since 2017-01-03 and no administrator has seen fit to lift the block. That is, you have failed to convince any administrator to lift the block and there's no longer any reasonable hope that this particular unblock request will lead to an unblock. This is without prejudice. You are welcome to make another request with a more compelling justification. Yamla (talk) 14:04, 28 January 2017 (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.

According to the available info, this account was created on 16 April 2013 and didn't edit until 1 January 2017 (the edit referred to above). I can see no deleted edits. The Carlos Danger account was created on 30 October 2016. Peridon (talk) 11:45, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

I have never heard of edits 'expiring', but I believe that some were lost in the very early days of Wikipedia before I was on here. I could be wrong on that. That was well before 2007 anyway. Peridon (talk) 11:47, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Anyone who has followed GamerGate and other alt-right crap on Wikipedia will be familiar with the pattern of long-dormant accounts that suddenly become active to promote a conservative agenda. I guess there's a marketplace where such accounts are exchanged. In this case the edit summaries and edits mean that if it's not a sock then it's a meatpuppet. But a sock is vastly more likely. Remember, it's not the account we block, it's the person. Guy (Help!) 13:12, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

The reason why you could not edit Rex Tillerson was not due to a prior block but simply that you tried to edit a semi-protected article without the necessary user rights. See WP:SEMI and WP:CONFIRM. Just Chilling (talk) 02:25, 22 January 2017 (UTC)