109.48.210.93

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I had a feeling this was going to happen. It seems every one who tries to change the figure in the list of largest empire is a sockpuppet of Roqui15. It seems a little off a single individual having 7 accounts in his possession as can been see here the accusations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Roqui15 and here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Roqui15/Archive. I'm not Roqui15 and not a sockpuppet. The arguments used by Naypta are are a little forced to say the least. "Raising the exact same issues repeatedly and the exact same points at Talk:List of largest empires, and with the exact same style of writing. IP geolocates to near Lisbon, and whilst the sockmaster hasn't given an exact location, they do mention being (unsurprisingly) Portuguese on their talk page". Well, this is hardly any evidence, a very forced evidence. I took a look at the talk page before I posted there and I even read the conversations already archived. I admit that I used many of the arguments already used by other users, in the archives as well. Obviously the arguments tend to be the same, since those are the only and indisputable arguments that prove our point. "With the exact same style of writing". I don't know about the other user but i use google translator in order to express myself more easily, he might do it too. But even if he doesn't, I took a look and I don't know see where and how we wrote the "exact" same way. "Ip geolocates near Lisbon". This proves nothing at all, https://ec.europa.eu/growth/tools-databases/regional-innovation-monitor/base-profile/lisbon-metropolitan-region Metropolitan region of Lisbon has about 2.800.000 people, the chances of I be Roqui15 are pretty low. "they do mention being (unsurprisingly) Portuguese". Again this argument is very odd, personally I decided to discuss in the page since I saw the obvious mistake on the page about the Portuguese empire containing only 5.5 million km2. I don't know if all the other users who were discussing the same are Portuguese, but if they are, I'm not surprised, since it is common sense here in Portugal that Brazil belonged entirely to Portugal. For the next user Cabayi (talk), "The IP posted to the talk page of Ppteles (talk · contribs) whose track record seems very similar to that of Roqui15. Just noting for the record." I don't even know what to say about this, I also posted on talk page of Empirecoins (talk), by your logic he would be Roqui15 too. "Obvious block evasion. Blocked IP 1 month. Closing." Obivously I'm not Roqui15, you cannot jump to this kind of conclusions with very weak arguments like those. It seems everyone who will discuss on that page the issue of the Portuguese empire from now on are Roqui15's accounts. 109.48.210.93 (talk) 13:57, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Decline reason:

No admission of sockpuppetry, no recognition of past mistakes. Decline. Cabayi (talk) 16:06, 22 July 2020 (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.

SPI reporter here. I'm sure that the user behind the IP address can appreciate that someone from the exact same region independently finding the exact same page just a few days after a user was blocked for sock puppetry connected to that page, writing a message in the exact same style, and arguing with all the same sources, does look rather suspect. I didn't ask for a CheckUser on the SPI report because this is an IP, not a user; 109.48.210.93, if you expressly consent to a public check by a CheckUser on your technical details along with those of Roqui15 and their known socks, the CU may be able to perform a check anyway. I'm not a CU myself, though, so I can't promise there'll be a CU willing to do it; likewise, CheckUser can only ever completely confirm someone's guilt, and never completely confirm innocence. Naypta ☺ | ✉ talk page | 14:09, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

"I'm sure that the user behind the IP address can appreciate that someone from the exact same region independently finding the exact same page just a few days after a user was blocked for sock puppetry connected to that page" It might look like it, but like someone said in the talk page there is already some recent YouTube videos which I checked myself showing the portuguese empire listed as having 5,5M km2, this could have been the reason why I went here, but actually is not, I simple notice in Wikipedia. "In the exact same style", Google translator tends to repeat the same words regardless of the word in Portuguese, I don't know if Roqui15 uses it or not but it looks to be the case, and using the word "exact" is off. "Arguing with all the same sources", if you took a look at the talk page in question you would see that many users were using the same sources, most of my sources and arguments like i said, were based on other arguments already used by other users. You can ask for CheckUser at will, I don't mind, but what will a CheckUser do, see the exact place I live? 109.48.210.93 (talk) 14:33, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

The other users making those same arguments with those same sources were indefinitely-blocked as sockpuppets of Roqui15, confirmed by CheckUser. A CheckUser can see various bits of technical information that might or might not link two users together; they wouldn't be able to see the exact place [you] live, no. If you're happy with that being performed, and with this IP address being potentially publicly linked to any user who technical evidence suggests is connected to it, I can flag the request for the attention of a CheckUser, but as mentioned above, I can't promise that they'll complete the check, not being one myself. Naypta ☺ | ✉ talk page | 14:52, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

I checked myself and EloctPT is the only one in the discussion said to be confirmed of Roqui15, the others are "suspected", anyway in the talk page archives there is plenty of discussions there about the same topic long before Roqui15, it's to hard believe a single individual would have dozens of accounts just to prove his point. About the CheckUser, if one cannot prove I'm not Roqui15 like you claim, is it really worth it? And for the matter, wouldn't Roqui15 IP be blocked? Meaning that he could not no longer do edits? 109.48.210.93 (talk) 15:07, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Proving a negative is very difficult in general, and for all practical purposes impossible when it comes to sockpuppetry on Wikipedia. You do not have to consent to a public CheckUser run - it is not required in any sense of the word; however, if you are not a sockpuppet or a sockpuppeteer, technical evidence should not indicate any links. At the moment, the only evidence which is available for a reviewing administrator to consider is the behavioural evidence, which as discussed above, fairly strongly points to sockpuppetry. You're right that it's possible that some of these links are related to the use of Google Translate o/e, but neither you nor Roqui15 used translation for all your messages, clearly. (Not that I'm holding that against you in any way - I know just how difficult writing in a non-native language is!) Naypta ☺ | ✉ talk page | 15:17, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

But is behavioural evidence enough to block a user? Without proof? As for the translation i don't know about Roqui15 but 90% of my messages were with the help of google translator. 109.48.210.93 (talk) 15:30, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Naypta, WP:Checkuser will not confirm an IP address to a named account (it's part of the privacy you're guaranteed when you sign up for an account). Also - "On some Wikimedia projects, an editor's IP addresses may be checked upon their request, typically to prove innocence against a sockpuppet allegation. Such checks are not allowed on the English Wikipedia and such requests will not be granted."

Roqui, that this IP is you is obvious. Ppteles shared your obession with the list of empires, Empirecoins did not. You are left with access to edit your talk page in order to appeal the block, not to continue your edit war with TompaDompa. If you continue to misuse it, it will be withdrawn. Cabayi (talk) 16:06, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

---