User talk:Foskow86

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet of AmeOnTheLoose (talk · contribs · global contribs · page moves · user creation · block log) that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here. ~~~~}} below, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:23, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Foskow86 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hi,I'm not the same user that hold the account of FrankStardust. We are both passionate in Wang Guangyi's work so we are collaborating. Hope this is not a violation of the Wikipedia's rules and hope there's a solution to this misunderstanding. Thanks in advice. 16:39, 18 February 2014 (UTC). Foskow86 (talk) 16:43, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Checkuser evidence suggests that both this account and FrankStardust are sockpuppets of AmeOmTheLoose and as such this account will not be unblocked. Apply at your primary account. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 17:16, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Foskow86 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

We were in good faith. My apologies if we made mistakes. But we didn't work on the same articles since I worked only on the german one. Maybe my mistake was to thank FrankStardust for his contribution. If this was a mistake, I'm terrible sorry. I'm a new user and I didn't know that it was a violation. Thanks in advance 19 February 2014 17:02(UTC). Foskow86 (talk) 17:03, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

No your "mistake" was to use more than one account in contravention of Wikipedia policy in any case your main account, User:AmeOnTheLoose, is unblocked and you are able to edit constructively from that account. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:55, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This blocked user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the 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 review while you are blocked.

Foskow86 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock)

Request reason:

I'm sorry to submit a third unblock request, I hope you don't get annoyed. But the point is that I, Foskow86, am not the user AmeOnTheLoose. And I can't use his account, as senior editor Callanecc suggest, since I'm not, I repeat it, the user AmeOnTheLoose. I would like to add that I, the user Foskow86, have been awarded from portal:Switzerland for my contribution to Wikipedia. You can see my name at the award's page: Portal:Schweiz/Edelweiss-Auszeichnung, which is on the German version of Wikipedia. It's sad that I, a passionate user, though a new user, have to be blocked for a misunderstanding. Thank you. 21 February 2014 14:14(UTC). Foskow86 (talk) 14:15, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

For the reasons outlined in the previous unblock requests. Checkuser in the sockpuppet investigation identified the link between the accounts. Euryalus (talk) 11:11, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first and then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page for as long as you are blocked.

You are aware that German Wikipedia and English Wikipedia have different standards, right? —Jeremy v^_^v ^Bori! 20:06, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but I think that having received the award means that my work is good and fair and that I've only worked on the German Wikipedia. --Foskow86 (talk) 10:13, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

When you say "we" what do you mean? Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:13, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I mean me and AmeOnTheLoose. We are not the same person but we have been accused of sock puppeting because we are both working on Wang Guangyi's article and we are both passionate in his work so we are collaborating--Foskow86 (talk) 10:13, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]