Frogpenguin
Welcome!
|
Blocked as a sockpuppet edit
 | This account has been blocked indefinitely as a suspected sock puppet of G-Zay (talk · contribs · global contribs · page moves · user creation · block log) that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this is a sock puppet account, and your original account is blocked, please also note that banned or blocked users are not allowed to edit Wikipedia; and all edits made under this account may be reverted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. — Berean Hunter (talk) 19:16, 23 May 2015 (UTC) |
Frogpenguin (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Dear Administrators, I respectfully request that my account be unblocked because I do not know this G-Zay person or have anything to do with his or her account other than having received a strange notice a few days ago from a talk page involving his investigation. It turns out that both my username and Bomb319's were added by a third party who had nothing to do with the investigation, and additionally was mistaken as to our involvement. The investigator had accused me of sockpuppeting simply because I had temporarily logged in to Bomb319's account (with his permission, and as stated above, is allowed). He and I had been working very hard writing an article that user Bomb319 and I had co-authored. Since I was new to editing and wanted to do my very best I could on Wikipedia, Bomb319 briefly allowed me to use his account in order to help me learn how to edit to the standards demanded by Wikipedia. I then quickly changed over to my account once I had a better idea of what I was doing. Bomb319 and I both subsequently received a Sockpuppet notice, to which we felt was critically important to politely respond in order to emphasize that we were being accused of something we had never done. We both posted our respective explanations on the sockpuppet investigation talk page (for G-Zay) along with apologies for any inconvenience we may have caused. Now, it appears that we are being told that we have done something wrong via having had contact with this person who inadvertently or not, made wrongful accusations against us in the first place. Please examine any records that you may possess and review any history you have regarding my edits (and those of Bomb319) and you will find me to be a staunch believer in the integrity of the Wikipedia system. I would never, ever, ever do anything that was not in the best interests of Wikipedia. I view the site as one of the world's great legacies to learning and would never do anything to jeopardize it. Thank you very much in advance for having taken the time to investigate this matter. Sincerely, Frogpenguin Frogpenguin (talk) 21:40, 23 May 2015 (UTC)Frogpenguin
Accept reason:
Please see my comment below.
— Berean Hunter (talk) 01:28, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
- It is after 1 a.m. where I live so I will make a more thorough review and discuss further tomorrow.
— Berean Hunter (talk) 05:13, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your message. Your sense of fairness means a lot. Respectfully - Frogpenguin (talk) 05:43, 24 May 2015 (UTC)Frogpenguin
- I have left my comments for both of you concerning the appeal and unblocking at this section of Bomb319's talk page.
— Berean Hunter (talk) 01:26, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
Thank you so much for your prompt attention and for your decision. That is truly appreciated. With much gratitude - Frogpenguin (talk) 02:04, 25 May 2015 (UTC)Frogpenguin