User talk:Wbrasp

December 2018
.

It is clear to me that I'm being viewed as a sockpuppet (the technical detail why exact are probably less important), and the most important thing that I wanted to make clear (could be with less confusion) that my only account (ever) was/is Wbrasp (and I created this account: of course same user, not a different one) and that I was not payed to do contributions. I understand that the administrators can be suspicious that this is a sockpuppet. I'm not intending to continue damage or disruption (I guess only changes on 1 new page and this discussion here are seen as the main disruptions). My main goal here was to make it clear that I'm no sockpuppet, because I don't like to be part of the reason the SAFE Network page is down. I hope this block will be undone some time in the future, so I would at least have the chance to do useful contributions. I would be grateful if that would be possible.wbrasp (talk) 22:49, 30 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Have you any suggestions what I can do more to get an unblock or could you give an extra word about the exact reason (as I'm understanding it now: Sock puppetry of account JohnSaavn because suspicious timing of post edits?)? I think I've done the necessary reading (see the result above) and I'm out of ideas. Thanks in advance! wbrasp (talk) 15:26, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * There is very clearly a campaign by SAFE Network to get the Wikipedia article about their product embellished. At least part of that is being done via paid editing, solicited through Upwork, and several accounts have already been connected to the Upwork profile of a serial sockpuppeteer. Investigation also suggests that SAFE Network is co-ordinating off-wiki efforts outside of Upwork. Any account that suddenly appears out of nowhere to edit only the SAFE Network article is therefore extremely suspect. Your account, which although created in 2016 had never made a single edit, suddenly appeared to start editing the SAFE Network article and only the SAFE Network article, at exactly the same time as the apparent off-wiki co-ordination began. The chances of this being a co-incidence are in the slim-to-none category. Yunshui 雲 水 08:42, 2 January 2019 (UTC)


 * I can understand that you find it suspect. I can only speak of my own account here of course. If you call the SAFE Network a product, you can also call Wikipedia a product. Please be aware that it consists of a lot of volunteers. It is free, open source software so everyone can participate: it is not owned by anyone. I was reading the SAFE Network forum and I did see there that an new article of it that was created on Wikipedia (Upwork: I don't even know what that is). But I noticed some small, 'neutral' (in my opinion) errors in it and I corrected them with a minor edit. I also tried to add the logo (better to not do this if you can't find the license, I now realise this). I wasn't paid to do this, nor has anyone said that I had to do this. I personally wouldn't call correcting obvious minor mistakes that I noticed myself on an existing page clear evidence of promoting (WP:MTPPT). Adding the logo could be seen as a way of promoting, I understand that and won't do something similar in the future. I would be grateful to get the chance to do updates in the future on Wikipedia, this time on multiple articles (not the SAFE Network to prevent even further suspicion) and if there has to be a discussion concerning the content it has to happen on Wikipedia and not somewhere else. Although my account is a couple of years old (reasons why: see my block requests), my updates are only recently. So I would call myself a Wikipedia newbee. And reading the guidelines, I understand that it is recommended practice to give newbees the benefit of the doubt. I can understand that the idea is that the situation has to settle down a bit. But if my account stays blocked forever, that means Wikipedia can never get an improvement by me, who at least knows by now probably better than a lot of other people (I've done a lot of reading the last days) what the guidelines are. Thank you in advance! PS: probably not relevant here, but should the SAFE Network one day work even partially as promised it could also improve Wikipedia (Wikipedia could be stored on it in a better way as it is stored now). wbrasp (talk) 13:35, 2 January 2019 (UTC)