User talk:130.226.41.9

August 2020
Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month for block evasion. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:40, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.


 * jpgordon, request you to have a look at [this IP's contribution log] or [xtools]. Thank you! 130.226.41.9 (talk) 17:58, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Only Viktorpp can solve this, IMO
On August 5, was blocked, and on August 6 this IP showed up to push the same POV concerning a fairly-obscure article Jennifer Rubin (columnist). Your other recent crusade was at Articles_for_deletion/Jen_Perelman, putting much effort into the only !K vote besides the article's creator, who was found by checkuser to be the same as blocked user Viktorpp.

The similar pleas of innocence from all "three" of you seem unlikely to produce any unblocks. Only Viktorpp can really address this situation. An honest willingness to be part of the Wikipedia community, where decisions made by consensus don't always end up where you want them, would go a long way. HouseOfChange (talk) 18:18, 30 August 2020 (UTC)


 * HouseOfChange I have been contributing off and on since 2010. Viktorpp is a newbie, by comparison, at least on English language Wikipedia. I know him in real life and he requested me to have a look at Rubin redirect discussion. So I did. The offensive comment "Whatever the community consensus is, hopefully everyone will consider the issue coolly and with an open mind, rather than responding with knee-jerk actions based on preconceived notions or the actions of the submitter. "
 * But I did not vote in that discussion, because while I agree with most of rationales put forward by him, I thought the redirect was the wrong way to go about it. So I "borrowed" the points made by him, and started an RFC. After 10 years and 250+ edits, I am blocked for the crime of agreeing with someone and the terrible action of initiating an WP:RFC?
 * As for Perelman AfD, again, I know the author (wife of Viktorpp) in real life and was invited by her to comment. I made the comment which I thought was appropriate. Since I agreed with her, that's what I said in my comment. If I had disagreed with her, I would have voted against her. I do not take directions from either of the two - rather, since I have more experience than them, they occasionally ask for feedback on their contributions. Lastly, with respect to Perelman AfD, a single vote/comment can hardly be classified as a "crusade". This is unnecessarily trigger-happy. 130.226.41.9 (talk) 20:04, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Up until August this year that shared IP address made infrequent but mild-mannered encyclopedia-building contributions. Then all of a sudden on August 6, you make dozens of edits concerning Jennifer Rubin. Then silence for 3 weeks, until on August 26, at Perelman AfD, you add a 2300-byte Keep argument (three edits) --then 3 hours later you return to add a 1600 byte "point of order" (4 more edits.) To me that behavior was more of a "crusade" than "a single vote/comment." I am not an admin, my point in coming  here was to offer what would have been (I thought) helpful advice if you were one person using 3 accounts. You say that's not the case. Wishing you good luck. HouseOfChange (talk) 21:27, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
 * HouseOfChange I have explained the situation above. The dozens of Jennifer Rubin (columnist) edits are one comment in the redirect discussion, an RFC and a comment within the RFC. For Perelman AfD, I have a vote and a comment. The overcounting of edits is due to revising my comments. But I appreciate the intent to help.130.226.41.9 (talk) 21:46, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I am not an admin, but if you want to get unblocked, it would help if you showed understanding of and respect for the reasons Wikipedia blocks people who do what you did, i.e. WP:STEALTH and WP:MEAT. You didn't just respond to a ping, you dove enthusiastically into two contentious discussions on behalf of the POV of your friends, to the extent that others believed (and may still believe) you had simply lent your computer keyboard to them. See also Guide_to_appealing_blocks. HouseOfChange (talk) 12:34, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you, HouseOfChange. Having now read WP:STEALTH, it was stealth canvassing, whether intended with malice or not. Of course, I'll tell my friends not to do that anymore, and to post Uw-canvass if they do. Is there a badge or notice I can display on my userpage to discourage such stealth canvassing? --130.226.41.9 (talk) 17:38, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Don't feel too badly, it is a natural behavior in real life to ask friends for help and to want to help friends who ask. Wikipedia really pushes back against this behavior, including giving it very unflattering names, because in the context of Wikipedia, even though discussions/debates are not supposed to be "votes," it is unfair to others when one person gets two !votes with no disclosure of having a friend behind the scenes. We don't have a badge for being alert to that problem. And I would be gentle in explaining to your friends, just point them to the policies in question and then you don't have to say much. is likely to stay blocked until he stops insisting he did nothing wrong by wasting people's time with a bunch of nonsense AfDs. You and  are likely to be unblocked if you say you will disclose (any time you jump into the same discussion) that you know each other in RL -- and also of course that neither of you will make edits for Viktorpp. HouseOfChange (talk) 22:39, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

June 2021
Your edit to Arab Spring has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images&mdash;you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 13:48, 27 June 2021 (UTC)