User talk:FilipeWhite

UTRS 54145
is closed. -- Deep fried okra ( talk ) 00:48, 1 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Can you explain this block? I only see one edit by this editor, and that was to create this unblock request, so I'm unsure what you based the block on. CaptainEek  Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 07:25, 23 February 2022 (UTC)


 * I didn't recall so I had to do a bit of digging. I think this account was blocked as a sock puppet of User:Arthur Brum based on checkuser evidence, interest in Bertrand of Orleans-Braganza (compare with known socks Ottoman Editor, Tercessuinotlim, Guatimozin and Southern Person) and addition of image files on Luiz of Orleans-Braganza, which is a constant problem from Arthur Brum socks which endlessly and repeatedly upload said file (see for example and most recently  and ). After uploading the file to commons, under various file names, the socks try to add the file here (e.g. ). I think there may be further evidence now not accessible because it was in the file history of deleted commons files. DrKay (talk) 19:44, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

— I'm not a sock puppet of any kind. Although i probably did try to add images to these articles (cause i know these articles and have made edits on them myself on the Portuguese Wikipedia), i didn't know other people had tried to do so in the past, or that they were banished for it. I don't quite know what i can do to fix it, or to prove to you that i am not a fake account of anyone, or that i have no relations to this Arthur fella. I don't think these can quite be considered evidence, as all i've actually done was trying to publish images in articles. It's not my fault other people have done so in the past, and i didn't know these images broke any rules. Doesn't wikipedia hold the IP of it's users, so we can prove that i'm not an alternate account for that Arthur guy? I'm sure there's a way we can sort this out. I just want my privileges back cause i did nothing wrong and i don't really like being accused of such. Let's talk... Please. FilipeWhite (talk) 19:58, 23 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Since you've never edited english WP before, why do you need an unblock anyway? CaptainEek  Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 19:58, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

— I have never done so before cause i usually spent more time on articles of my native language. Now i see information that can be added on such articles in the English language, and i'd like to contribute, that is all. Proof to that is that i only noticed i have been blocked about a year after the block. I tried to edit something on PDT and then i was informed i couldn't cause i had been blocked, only then i came here requesting my unblock, confused for such block, as i had never broke any of the rules before. That's about it. FilipeWhite (talk) 20:03, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

— Anyone there? I'm still waiting for a response. FilipeWhite (talk) 00:09, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

— Can anyone please help me? I'm just trying to talk and see if there's a way to prove i'm innocent of these accusations. Don't leave me hanging here. Can't we sort this out? FilipeWhite (talk) 16:43, 3 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Your block request is 'I don't own other accounts ... You may check my history.' But that's just what I would expect Arthur Brum to say: e.g. 'I do not have another account ... You can check my IP'. I will not stand in the way if another admin wishes to unblock you, and they may do so without further reference to me, but I'm not willing to unblock you myself. DrKay (talk) 18:19, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
 * But you have no proper evidence against me whatsoever, can't your case be proved based on IP adress or anything like that? The only reason you claim i'm a puppet account is that i showed the same interest in the same articles as a guy that broke the rules, it doesn't make sense. If i were a fake account why would i only try to go back and break the rules more than a year after you banned me? I won't say you banned me for no reason, as i do think admins have the right to claim suspicion for safety purposes, but you continue accusing me of doing something i didn't while you have no proof to back it up. It's completely unfair, i'm trying to be reasonable, i asked you what could i do to prove my innocence, what could you do to help me, but you insist on saying that you did nothing wrong and i'm still banned for breaking a rule (that i didn't). And okay, that guy used the same request as i did, because perhaps you guys actually could check people's IP's to see if the accusations are legit or not (and in my case, they are not, i do not care about Arthur Brum, if he did something whatever, i have nothing to do with it). Why do i have to pay for other people's mistakes? You could just unblock me and see if i ever actually break any of the rules. Wouldn't that make a point on my innocence? Until then, this is just not right, not at all. I don't judge you on trying to make the website safer, but i do feel really, really offended by these accusations. I really don't like being accused of something i didn't, and now being banned from Wikipedia because of it? Now that's really something else. I'll say it again: We can talk about it and try to find a solution to the problem, some way to prove i didn't do any of these stuff, let's just sort this out, don't leave me hanging here, as an admin i bet you have good intentions on being fair, so i bet there is something we can try, i'm asking nicely, you wouldn't want to be on my shoes (being banned unfairly and being accused of being someone else, that is). FilipeWhite (talk) 19:19, 7 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Hey, fella. Can you just explain to me one simple thing? If i really were a sockpuppet account, why would i be here for all this time trying to have my account unblocked? If i were sockpuppet, wouldn't it be more logical to create yet another sockpuppet account instead of trying to unblock one of them? If i was Arthur, why would i be wasting my time trying to unban one of my dozens of fake accounts instead of just making another one? It doesn't make really sense. Wouldn't that logic be just enough of a point to prove i'm just a random guy that was mistaken by a fake account? I have nothing against you by any chance, i know you are only trying to make things safer around here, but i'm also trying to prove that i am not a fake account of any kind and i did not break any rules whatsoever. Can't we just talk so i can prove it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by FilipeWhite (talk • contribs)
 * We have sock puppets who have been trying to get unblocked literally for years, even a decade, so yes, it is possible. 331dot (talk) 09:13, 4 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Alright, mate, what do you want me to say? What can i do to prove i am not a sockpuppet? I am more than willing to prove my innocence, i just need the opportunity. In your profile page it says you "Assume Good Faith", well, let me show you i am acting in good faith, give me a chance to prove it. You claim all i did was saying "it's not me" and that's not enough, well, fair, but i don't really have much to say since it's really not me. As a moderator, please tell me what can i do to prove it's not me. What else can i do? Just accept the unfair and untruthful accusations and get banned forever for something i didn't do? I bet you, as a moderator, wouldn't want innocent people to get punished unfairly either, so i'll say it again: Let's find a way to solve this, please! I don't really see why not believe me, if i start breaking rules or doing any vandalism, i'd just get banned again and that would be it. Let me prove that i'm not a sockpuppet and that i actually have good intentions here, but i can't do this if you're not willing to make things right. Tell me, what should i say on my unblock request that would be valid for y'all? You said i didn't specify what edits i intended to make, well i don't have many ideas right now but i found out i was blocked when i tried to edit the page PDT by adding "Founder: Leonel Brizola" and updating the flag to the new one that they use nowadays, since the flag showed in the article is outdated. That would be it for now, but of course i would make other edits in the future. You can check my editing history on Portuguese Wikipedia if you want, all i do is useful edits correcting mistakes, never been banned for vandalism or sockpuppetry, i think that by itself shows that i have no vile intentions here, but i'm willing to prove further if you want. FilipeWhite (talk) 16:07, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
 * As I have already weighed in, I can only suggest that you make another unblock request for someone else to review. If they are convinced, they will remove the block and do not need my input to do so. 331dot (talk) 16:41, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Unblock Request

 * I'm currently part of the foundation of a new political party in my country and the party is already registered in the national electoral, waiting for the bureaucratic process to end for it to be officially allowed to run for elections. We already made a page for it in the Portuguese Wikipedia and we're currently waiting the end of the process to also make one in the English Wikipedia, and adding it to lists that may include it. I understand you wanted to ask me what project it was, but was it necessary to ask while declining my Request without a reason? I attempted to previously prove why the block was not necessary just like Wikipedia advises and yet i received no proper response whatsoever. I still wonder what will be necessary for this situation to be solved. FilipeWhite (talk) 19:46, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
 * That is not how the English language Wikipedia works. What you are proposing is promotion. I see no reason to unblock you at this time. - UtherSRG (talk) 20:18, 13 January 2024 (UTC)


 * It's not promotion if it's written in an informative non-proselytization manner, however i do understand the concern. That is not the sole reason i'd like to be unblocked anyway. What i don't see is the reason to keep me blocked. The reason to unblock me (that you claim not to see) is the main reason addressed in the request: this block is not necessary to protect Wikipedia in any way, since i am not a sockpuppet account and have no intention (or history) of attempting to vandalize Wikipedia whatsoever. Shouldn't that be reason enough? Why ignore all of the attempts to prove my innonence only to focus on what specific things i intend to edit? Blocks are meant to keep Wikipedia safe, and the main subject here is how this block has absolutely no utility on doing so. FilipeWhite (talk) 19:17, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Since you continue to not take our definition of promotion to heart, I see no reason you follow our policies, so I see no reason to unblock you. - UtherSRG (talk) 19:21, 18 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Alright, alright, fine, i can't write about a project i have involvement in, i get it. So i won't write about it, and if i do so, feel free to block me again and delete anything i wrote, in addition i will never request an unblock again if that happens. I hope this statement helps to show i only have good intentions to contribute to Wikipedia, and no personal involvement in my life is the main reason for my Unblock Requests, the main reason is what was already stated (and proved): I have no history of vandalizing Wikipedia and no intentions of doing so, i am not a fake account nor i have ever attempted to create one (even though i've been unfairly blocked for about 3 years). What else do all of you want me to do or say? I have followed the process of Unblock Requests, followed the Wikipedia Guidelines while doing so, gave every justification possible, proved through screenshots how i am not the one they accuse me of being, and yet nothing happens. I don't understand what you want of me anymore. Apparently the guidelines are not enough anymore, so there's something else i can do to solve this situation. I'd only wish any of you could explain or help. FilipeWhite (talk) 19:35, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
 * That's because you have convinced no one that you are not a sock, nor that you are sincere in your requests. I will no longer be responding. - UtherSRG (talk) 19:54, 18 January 2024 (UTC)


 * I have literally screenshoted a conversation between me and the guy you guys claim me to be and posted here for everyone to see, how is that not enough? What else can i do to prove? He admitted that he still uses Wikipedia on fake accounts to this day, and yet i'm here being punished for things he did while i haven't done a thing. In what world is that fair or just? I just don't understand, none of this makes any sense. I'm just confused and completely unaware of what i should do, since following the Wikipedia Guidelines for unblocking clearly isn't enough. FilipeWhite (talk) 20:04, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
 * The Arbitration Committee received a request to review this block. We don't review sockpuppetry blocks that are not marked as CheckUser blocks, so we won't be taking action as a committee. That said, I did take a look at the block, and I have a few comments in my individual capacity. I am doubtful that this is a sockpuppet account. We have little technical evidence, and, due to the lack of edits on the English Wikipedia, little behavioural evidence. That aside, typical serial sockpuppeteers would have moved on to a bunch of new accounts rather than spend two years trying to get one old "sock" unblocked. That said, the proposed edits are promotional, so in an unblock request, I would want to see an understanding of our conflict of interest guideline (see also WP:SPAM and WP:PROMO), along with a description of intended edits if unblocked. I can get live with an unblock provided we can reasonably expect compliance with our content policies and guidelines, which is, at this point, unclear. Pinging DrKay as the original blocking admin. Maxim (talk) 15:06, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the ping. As I said above, in 2022, if another admin wishes to unblock, I'm fine with that. DrKay (talk) 17:23, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Greetings, Maxim, thank you for your note, i have re-read the guidelines about Promotion and i understand now that articles on things such as political parties need to be written by an unbiased author, which i don't qualify. Therefore i no longer intend on writing the article i stated before. I will discard any future plans for such. However i still wish to be unblocked since i don't consider the accusations made against me to be pertinent and i do promise to all of you that i am a good-faith user that just wants to use Wikipedia in a helpful friendly manner. FilipeWhite (talk) 15:11, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
 * What kinds of edits do you plan to make if you are unblocked? Maxim (talk) 15:13, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Since i have answered your questions below, and i assume there is no other issue, and with DrKay having answered that they are fine if another admin unblocks me, should i make another Unblock Request? If there is any other issue i must address before attempting to do so, please let me know. FilipeWhite (talk) 17:50, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I've unblocked you per the discussion here and DrKay's comment above. Maxim (talk) 19:10, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Much appreciated! Thank you, Maxim. FilipeWhite (talk) 19:12, 23 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Apologies, Maxim, i forgot to mention that. I plan to make in the English Wikipedia the same types of edits i do in the Portuguese Wikipedia, as you all can check my Edit History there, what i usually do (and intend to do here) is to correct spelling and grammar mistakes, and also add minor informations on already existing articles (such as i have done recently about LGBTs in the Anglican Communion here.). I am a graduating History Student in the University of Porto, so i also plan on making additions (with proper sources, of course) in Historical articles in the future. FilipeWhite (talk) 15:22, 23 January 2024 (UTC)