User talk:Acc013

March 2021

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to List of micronations 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.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: List of micronations was changed by Acc013 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.864774 on 2021-03-22T22:31:54+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 22:31, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

For your information: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SwedenAviator. The Banner talk 10:01, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 2021

Hello, I'm The Banner. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Terra nullius have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. The Banner talk 08:40, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am not using it as advertising. It is a well known Micronation along those plots of land. Just like enclava and Liberland.

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Terra nullius. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. You claim their own websites as neutral sources? Please, stop this promotion campaign. The Banner talk 10:29, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How is RTL, Likaclub, etc its own sources theirs? The only primary source liked is verdisgov.org. I will contact an administrator if you continue this biasness. Acc013 (talk) 10:32, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please do that, but I do not think that this will help you in anyway. Remember the sockpuppet investigation? The Banner talk 10:40, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I understand there is a sockpuppet investigation, but that is a different subject. You're claiming that RTL.hr, etc is owned by that micronation.

Your recent editing history at Terra nullius shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. The Banner talk 10:36, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Are you that much of a child? You're the one causing the war. The article was like this for months with the Verdis redirect also approved until you came along and started disrupting the article. Acc013 (talk) 10:38, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, arguments just personal attacks? Too bad for you. The Banner talk 12:55, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet of SwedenAviator (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · logs · block log · arb · rfc · lta · SPI · cuwiki) 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 account is not a sockpuppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 09:42, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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).

Acc013 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hello, I'd like to appeal. I am not a sockpuppet of 'SwedenAviator', and I can assure you that. Most of my edits haven't even been on the topic of 'Verdis'. Is there a possibility I could be unblocked? I believe that this block was largely irrelevant, and that the user that reported me was very biased, and I was trying to prevent biased vandalism. If you look at his talk pages, it is nothing but conflict edits and arguing.

Decline reason:

Having reviewed the evidence at the sockpuppet investigation, I am satisfied that the findings made there were correct. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 04:03, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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.