User talk:Alextiffin88

Wikipedia and copyright
Hello Alextiffin88, and welcome to Wikipedia. All or some of your addition(s) to Beatrice Wind Farm has had to be removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material without permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributing to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from your sources to avoid copyright or plagiarism issues here.


 * You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
 * Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
 * Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Copyrights. You may also want to review Copy-paste.
 * If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. However, there are steps that must be taken to verify that license before you do. See Donating copyrighted materials.
 * In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are public domain or compatibly licensed), it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at the help desk before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
 * Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you can, but please follow the steps in Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 13:51, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

January 2019
Raised Arb Case on Philip Cross and suddenly cannot edit

Blocked for sockpuppetry
I read the instructions I understand that I made an error  by having two accounts but how can I remedy this?

Please see talk page.

I asked for username deletion of the other account.

At no time was I switching accounts. I made an error and have now been reading the WP rules more. I have been engaging in talk pages and was not making disruptive edits.

Can you advise how I can sort this situation out? I'm find editing theraputic and as you can see In have been editing pages on windfarms and power substations. I only set up the other account as I couldn't login to this one.

Please help.

Unblock request
Thank you that helps clarify things I didn't know that. Will they see the request then even though it's closed? I can't contact them.


 * Hi I understand that I made an error by having a second account namely.


 * I did not do this as an attempt to evade a ban, make malicious edits or edit war.


 * I am truly sorry for this and as you can see from my history, once I regained access to this account, I stopped using my new one.


 * I made it completely obvious that I was the same person.


 * I hope I can be allowed a second chance on good faith.


 * I am happy to take any advice as I never intended to offend.


 * Could I please have the evidence sent by as they stated they had submitted evidence on my Arbcom request.


 * I opened it as I believed there was a possible breach. You dealt with the original case and I know you're well informed.


 * I made it in good faith and some of the other editors, including agree he "may" have been testing the boundaries.


 * The case has been closed so I accept that as final.


 * I will not open any further accounts as I want to be able to edit freely and will await your decision.


 * I do truly apologize and wish for a second chance even if with conditions.

Kind regards


 * Friday 18th January 2019, 10:13


 * Personally, I'm not convinced this was all "above board". The second account was used to create an autobiographical draft, which was never touched by your main account. To me, that looks like trying to hide the association, especially when one of your edit summaries of the second account referred to yourself in the third person. I do not intend to lift this block, but you are welcome to appeal it to the Arbitration Committee by emailing arbcom-en@wikimedia.org. ~ Rob 13 Talk 13:56, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

I thought I'd made that in sandbox thing as a test to see how it all works. You can see I have to repeatedly fix things.

I never set out to do anything bad. I just wanted to edit so it's accurate. It is very obvious it's me that had both accounts and as I said, as soon as I regained access to my old account I stopped using the new one.

I may be an idiot yes but I certainly meant nothing malicious by it.

I'm sorry and I fully accept I did things wrong. I have never been in trouble before and am pleading for a second chance.

I'm so upset. Sorry for going on but this is something I feel strongly on as I have made a genuine error and am asking for a second chance with good faith even with conditions.

Please

--Alextiffin88 (talk)

Advice
Hello, Alextiffin88,

Having seen these kinds of blocks before, it would help your case if you identified all user accounts you have created and identify when you used them. Being unblocked means not only taking responsibility for whatever infraction you committed but being forthcoming with all information about the circumstances. Being unblocked can be a matter of trust and being forthcoming can help rebuild that trust. Liz Read! Talk! 06:27, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Alleged sockpuppetry and some advice to Alex
My comments here should be read as preparatory work before appealing the problematic closure of the Philip Cross AE case. The second part is some personal advice to Alex regarding the proper or improper use of multiple accounts.

The two accounts aren't hiding anything
I copy here part of my quick comment yesterday on GoldenRing's talk page:

"Of course Checkuser will show the same IP address, the two accounts made no effort to try to conceal that they are the same person, and left plenty of evidence to that effect all over the place, including off-wiki. Of course I expect to deal with Rob as the blocking admin in the first instance, and that particular aspect is of course not for you to deal with. I was simply explaining that my main reason for appealing is that Sandstein ignored my first comment this morning, which pointed out that Alex is not really sockpuppeting. Not a good idea to set up two accounts, but understandable for a relatively inexperienced editor who lost access to his first account. He is obviously not intending to deceive editors into thinking they are separate accounts, which is the definition of sockpuppeting. And, nota bene, I won't hesitate to point out intended deception when I see it, even for an editor for whom I have the highest respect. There are obviously other reasons as well for appealing, but Sandstein's ignoring my comment is the main one."

It is blindingly obvious that and  are the same person:
 * Randomiser67 was created on 2018-06-25 and has only made 32 edits
 * Alextiffin88 was created on 2013-12-23 and has made only 164 edits in that time


 * Randomiser67 created the article about Alex: Draft:Alex Tiffin on 12/11/2018
 * this article states that Alex lives in Culbokie, that his twitter handle is @RespectIsVital and he's appeared on RT discussing the "brutal" effects of the benefits system
 * Randomiser67 tried to set up [[File:Alex Tiffin and Hugh_Grant.jpg]] and Draft:RespectIsVital Blogger
 * Randomiser67 made several edits to Culbokie, where Alex lives


 * Alextiffin88's user page, before it was obliterated with the sockpuppet tag, states that Alex lives in Culbokie and that his twitter handle is @RespectIsVital
 * Alextiffin88's edits are mostly about the area he lives in, oilfields and renewable energy projects

In short, almost everywhere you look, it's obvious that Randomiser67 is owned by Alex. There is no real sockpuppetry going on, apart perhaps from one (and only one) overlap where Randomiser67 removed a photo from Rachel Riley on 10 January and 5 days later Alextiffin88 removed the same photo. I see this case as an innocent mistake by a relatively inexperienced user.

Advice to Alex
It isn't necessary that one of your accounts be deleted. What you should do is post a notice on each of your user pages drawing attention to the other account. Yes, I know the relation is pretty obvious from the above, but it helps to be open and clear. You should pick one of your accounts (I strongly recommend Alextiffin88, as it's the older account, and has more edits), and stick to using that account only. If you have any other accounts – I don't think you do – you should list them as well on the user pages. You should also post an explanation of how you came to have more than one account.

FWIW, I have a legitimate second account, User:NSH002, which links back to my main account, and my main user page lists, and gives an explanation of all my other accounts. Since everything is open, there is no sockpuppetry involved.

--NSH001 (talk) 11:54, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Dear firstly, thank you for the advice.

Should I be unlocked I will implement the advice about linking the two accounts.

Secondly, I apologize that you became involved. I opened the AE as I genuinely believed there was an infraction. PC edited Rachel Riley on January 9th after she had told George Galloway to "fuck off". It was on this that I based the reasoning of the breach but poorly worded. User Icewhiz immediately discounted my concern and said evidence had been privately emailed about me. I'm assuming that is why I've been blocked. Icewhiz has been taking ownership of Rachel Riley and has today removed a section which the talk was in consensus should stay.

I then uncovered that Philip Cross had edited linked to Kamm in November. Although this is classed as "stale" it is extremely relevant as, his Arbcom which was incidentaly overseen in part by, centred on Galloway and Kamm. I did enclose the diff for this.

I am very good at researching process rather than putting into action as can be seen by my repeated edits to fix even templates.

I finish with thanking you for helping explain my situation, it means a lot as I was really upset about losing the ability to edit. I use it as therapy.

I raised the AE as I like things to be right. I was polite to PC and even asked Icewhiz for help to no avail.

Thanks Alex

--Alextiffin88 (talk) 13:53 GMT, January 18th 2019

Footnote
I was going to ping Rob, but haven't done so as he's already been pinged above. Rob, please consider all this section as addressed to you as well as Alex. --NSH001 (talk) 12:01, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

I also note here that it remains my intention to appeal the AE case to Arbcom. I was reluctant to get involved in the first place (I hate getting involved in ANI-type discussions BTW, and this is my first time at AE), but now that I have invested so much effort in it, I am not going to give up. It's the job of Admins at AE to enforce Arbcom decisions, and they should do their job. --NSH001 (talk) 12:18, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Unblock
[User:Alextiffin88|Alex Tiffin]] (talk) 23:05, 20 January 2019 (UTC)


 * As noted above, I do not intend to unblock you, and your remaining appeal option lies with the Arbitration Committee. ~ Rob 13 Talk 03:11, 21 January 2019 (UTC)