User talk:Martauwo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Martauwo, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!  199.125.109.78 05:13, 6 September 2007 (UTC)


dear 199.125.109.78

thanks for your message. wikipedia certainly is an interesting place. will doubtlessly be in touch with the many questions of a new wikipedian

Martauwo 01:43, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

dear administrator

i have been blocked and accused of repeated abuse - can you please explain what abuse i am guilty of?

thanks

Martauwo 18:28, 11 September 2007 (UTC)


This user's request to have the autoblock on his/her IP address lifted has been DECLINED.

Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "Martauwo". The reason given for Martauwo's block is: "Abusing multiple accounts".

  • Decline reason:

You have not been autoblocked. However, you have been blocked directly as stated in your block log. Since you have not provided a reason for being unblocked, your request has been declined. You may provide a reason for being unblocked by adding {{unblock|your_reason_here}} to your talk page. -- Vassyana 05:17, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

hello something odd is going on i am following a discussion on Kyiv/Kiev naming, and the last posting was signed by user 60.242.0.245. I clicked on that to see who it was and discovered that the user is blocked, my name appears in the accusation as apparently 'using multiple accounts.' i had been blocked by ryulong on 11 september 2007, and received no answer to my question about what repeated abuse i was being accused of, yet the block was lifted. can someone please explain what is going on? thanks Martauwo 05:03, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

i am new to wikipedia and may be making errors inadverently - please accept my apologies. i am quite confused by the various allegations, though, since i have one account and have been using it since i began visiting wikipedia. how can i demonstrate my innocence? Martauwo 05:10, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

This blocked user (block log | autoblocks | rangeblocks | unblock | contribs | deleted contribs) has asked to be unblocked, but an administrator has reviewed and declined this request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock request while you are blocked.

Request reason: "your_reason_here"

Decline reason: "This is a very suspicious situation. Your IP has no blocks listed. Yet, on the 11th, you claimed to have received a block message.[1] You obviously were not blocked.[2] Your first block shows up as occuring on the 16th (today).[3] It appears the only way you would encounter a block message on the 11th is if you are using multiple accounts. As a result, I must accept the block reason and decline your request. — Vassyana 05:48, 16 September 2007 (UTC)"

Please make any further unblock requests by using the {{unblock}} template. However, abuse of the template may result in your talk page being protected.

it seems that i have pasted the wrong template, my apologies, so hopefully this is the correct one. i am being accused of using multiple accounts - is it possible that i have logged in twice and that seems like i am using multiple accounts? i have one username and have been using it since i started visiting wikipedia. i am new to this process, and my be making mistakes, for which i apologise. however, i am used to people asking when something strange occurs rather than making accusations. i am a bit suprised that the administrator blocking me is not responding to my questions, thanks Martauwo 05:33, 16 September 2007 (UTC)


Something strange indeed is going on. Please look into this and I would ask that another administrator look into this as well. Here are copies of messages which appeared on my user page informing that I was blocked (unfortunately the date does not appear) as well copies of the e-mails I sent to Ryulong who was blocking me (which do have dates.) The accusations of ‘continued abuse from this account,’ and ‘using multiple accounts’ are false. I often log on from different places, but have one account which I always use. I would like to see some evidence of this abuse before being penalized, and I am wondering why Ryulong does not respond to my questions. Thanks in advance

this appeared on 11 September:

You have been blocked from editing. 64.231.0.0/19 (your account, your IP address or a range of addresses) was blocked by Ryulong for the following reason (see our blocking policy):

Continued abuse from this address. Please contact your internet service provider so we may be able to address these concerns. To edit, please contact request an account. Your IP address is 64.231.11.194, and your block has been set to expire: indefinite.

This is a copy of my e-mail to Ryulong:

Tue 9/11/2007 2:10 PM Dear Ryulong

I was trying to contact Messedrocker to let her/him know that there is a problem with the RFC on the Kiev Talk page and encountered a red sign that said I am blocked indefinitely. The issue is that the RFC says, 'This tag will automatically place the page on the The following discussions are requested to have community-wide attention:

  • Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard Is there enough support for alternative start dates to be considered the viewpoint of, at least, a significant minority?
  • Talk:National Liberation War of Macedonia There is a dispute about the neutrality of the article between Kobra85 and Revizionist, with admin Future Perfect at Sunrise and a few others sometimes involved in the discussion. There are basically two versions being argued for here. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title
  • Talk:Contras Need support of third party to request mediation unless you can think of a way to solve reversion and disputes
  • Talk:Knights Hospitaller Should order be described as "revived." Does it "claim" sovereignty or does it have sovereignty?
  • Talk:List of infantry divisions of the Soviet Union 1917–1957 This was a national troop type that can not be readily translated into English, with a variety of translations offered (see copious sources above). The naming in Wikipedia is based on the same principle as that used for Cossacks, Hussars and Landwehr
  • Talk:GADA 601 GADA 601 is an article about a South American military unit, the majority of the article covers a war with the British. Which form of English spelling should be used?
  • Talk:Belgrade Offensive there are several issues involved 1)that at the operation was not a combine/joint operation between the Red Army and the Yugoslav Army at the planing involving higher headquarters, but only involved front-line incidental cooperation at tactical level as required on those occasions when the troops from the two forces encountered each other; 2) That when this encounter occurred, the Yugoslav troops came under command of the Red Army (I need to provide a source for this, but English sources seem rare); 3) that the sources provided by User:DIRECTOR are valid, one being derived from a very general reference in the Library of Congress country dara entry, and others from a site the owner of which admitted they are not referenced (even if true)
  • Talk:List of military occupations The opposition to renaming this article is based on the suggestion that another article can not be created to list pre-1907 occupations due to difficulty in defining the term
  • Talk:Fear: Anti-Semitism in Poland after Auschwitz Is it appropriate to use a represntative quote by the book's author stated it's main thesis, as well as quotes from favorable book reviews, even if some editors find the POV of the book objectionable
  • Talk:Master Mahan Is the "Master Mahan
  • Talk:Chetniks Deleting of WWII USHMM pictures
  • Talk:Pomeranian duchies and dukes Persistent reverts to push Polish names here as well as in various related articles

To add a discussion to RFC:

  • Add {{RFChist| section=section name !! reason=a short summary of the discussion !! time= ~~~~~ }}
  • Warning: ! and = will not work anywhere in the template, except for parameter separation. {{ and }} might work outside of the time parameter. | works again.
  • Do not edit the RFC list directly; the bot will invariably undo your edits.
  • Report problems to Wikipedia talk:Requests for comments.

.' yet there is no link. When I clicked on it, it said to report problems to Messedrocker, which I was trying to do. As a newcomer to Wikipedia, it may be possible that I have done something incorrectly. Please advise. And when you have a moment, could you please advise Messedrocker that there is a problem with the link.

Thanks in advance

Martauwo 17:26, 16 September 2007 (UTC) There was no response. On 16 September I posted a question on Ryulong's talk page.


this appeared on my talk page 16 September 2007, after I enquired about another participant in a discussion which I have been following:

You have been blocked from editing. Martauwo (your account, your IP address or a range of addresses) was blocked by Ryulong for the following reason (see our blocking policy):

Abusing multiple accounts Your IP address is 67.68.35.61, and your block has been set to expire: indefinite.

this is a copy of my second e-mail to Ryulong: Sun 9/16/2007 12:54 AM Dear Ryulong

There appears to be some confusion. I was just following the discussion on the Kyiv/Kiev naming and the last posting was by someone identified as 60.242.0.245. I clicked on the number to see who that is to discover that the person is blocked and accused of being me, martauwo, using multiple accounts. Please look into this matter and note that I am not 60.242.0.245. I have also left a message for you on your talk page regarding a previous block, and would appreciate an answer when you have a moment. Thanks.

Martauwo 17:26, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

I am wondering why the first block has disappeared! Please advise and thanks

[edit] Big mistake

I apologize. When I reset another block a while ago, I checked the wrong box. All should be fixed now.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 21:26, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


thanks Martauwo 21:58, 19 September 2007 (UTC)