User talk:OneLittleDragon

Welcome!
Hello, OneLittleDragon, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Sarah-Jane (talk) 19:33, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

December 2015
This isn't worth fighting. It's too much stress. In my defense, I edited constructively for several years under the two accounts I regularly used. I was never warned or sanctioned in all that time on either account, with the exception of an article that got deleted on notability grounds (and which I accepted the deletion of). The third account was a one-off used to comment on an article talk page, and in retrospect was foolish and unnecessary. I misinterpreted the multiple account policy as allowing multiple accounts to protect privacy. I am very paranoid about protecting my privacy because of the particularly sensitive nature of one of the topic areas I edited in (abortion). I would be extremely embarrassed if people I know ever found out I had edited in that area. So I had an account dedicated to editing in that area, and another more general purpose one. But recently I worried I was making edits that could be identifiable on my general purpose account, so I stopped using it, intending to switch to this account as my general purpose account. Unfortunately, I didn't stop editing on the old general purpose account soon enough. It was programmed as autologin on my browser and I got lazy. I was careful never to edit the same articles with the different accounts, or to comment in the same discussions, because I wasn't trying to make it seem like I was multiple people so I could get away with things I wouldn't be able to otherwise. I just wanted to protect my privacy, and I went overboard. But a month ago I made the mistake of making a single edit to an article with my old general purpose account, then edited the same article with this account yesterday. I had abandoned the old general purpose account at the time, having not edited it in over a month, but I guess that still counts a violation of policy. I am sorry to have misunderstood the blocking policy. I never meant to disrupt Wikipedia, only preserve my privacy so I could contribute without fear of real-life embarrassment. I am sad that I will no longer be able to contribute here, but as they say, "When a door closes, a window opens." Perhaps this is a message to focus on more important pursuits. -OneLittleDragon (talk) 23:11, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm not unsympathetic to some of what you say. Your review of the history of these accounts is not completely accurate, even without addressing your reasons, which, of course, I have no way of knowing whether they're true or not. But considering that you longer wish to be unblocked, it wouldn't be constructive for us to go back and forth over the details. I am curious about one thing. You created OneLittleDragon in June of this year but didn't use the account until many months later. Why did you create the account at all? You are not compelled to respond; you may not even be watching this anymore, but it does strike me as odd. Finally, in case you are watching, I have a suggestion for the future. You may later change your mind and decide you do want to edit Wikipedia (many people who leave come back). If so, I'd wait at least six months before requesting an unblock per the standard offer. I can't make any promises, but if it appears that you haven't been socking - and that includes editing without logging in - during the six months, your request will be considered.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:25, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I do wish to be unblocked but I don't want to leave myself open to disappointment. I am mostly non-confrontational, which is why I mostly just edit here-and-there without getting too involved in the wiki at large. Yesterday was an exception, because it was upsetting to edit an article to add reliably sourced information, only to have it removed repeatedly by another user (XPrintGirl), and then be scolded for 3RR while the other user, who engaged in similar behaviour, was not. I can stand criticism, but not when it seems I am being singled out or treated unfairly. I have always endeavored to cite the information I add to articles with reliable sources, to find sources for unsourced information, and to remove information that cannot be verified. I don't intend to create additional accounts, but I am concerned that other people on the same IP -- who are not currently wiki editors like me but may wish to try their hand at it one day -- may suffer as collateral. And going through an involved process involving e-mail would compromise my privacy even more than it already has been. -OneLittleDragon (talk) 01:39, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Someone is not a sock puppet because he or she makes edits another user does not like. It seems that the whole thing came because this user made edits to the article Benedict Cumberbatch wich another editor did not like. The sources were reliable, such as The Independent, and yet the other user claimed they weren't. And then, in order to get rid of OneLittleDragon he claimed he was a sock puppet, which is slanderous. And an admin who finally blocked this account fell for that user's ruse. These are some of the reasons why editing on the Wikipedia is no longer fun. Well, the user who started this got his way, but at which price? Of course if the other user reads this he will furiously deny any wrongdoing but that hardly changes the facts. The truth remains the thruth.--Maxl (talk) 09:54, 28 March 2016 (UTC)