User talk:Tseung kang 99

Renaming

Hello! The use of multiple accounts is not allowed, thus, you have to choose between these two accounts: Tseung kang 99 (formerly Abcbabc11111) and Iloveviolin45 (formerly Whong922) and forget the other one. Thanks. I am not a number (talk) 08:08, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Tseung kang 99, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Tseung kang 99! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Lectonar (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:04, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Tseung kang 99 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

UTRS appeal #25062 was submitted on May 06, 2019 01:33:09. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 01:33, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Note: the user pushed copyvio to Wikipedia. Moreover, uploaded copyvio to Commons, some deliberately in the PNG format to hinder detection. Where does the user admit wrongdoing? Incnis Mrsi (talk) 07:36, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

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).

Tseung kang 99 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I have waited a few months now for this account to get unblocked as informed by the arbitration committee. I did not intend for any spam at all. It was my first time to publish a wiki page and I was in learning steps to use it. Plz let me know if any actions are required for it to get unblocked.

Decline reason:

This request does not address your use of multiple accounts and addition of copyright violations. Moreover, what will you edit about if unblocked? MER-C 09:00, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

---

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).

Tseung kang 99 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I am well aware that I violated rules regarding the use of multiple accounts and addition of copyright violations issues. As noted to the arbitration committee earlier, these happened because I was new to the platform. I will abide to the rules of Wikipedia moving forward. For example, I waited a few months as suggested by arbitration committee before requesting unblock. I intend to mainly involved in subjects that I am interested, such as matters related to physics, finance, math, music, computer, education, etc. As per your request User:Boing! said Zebedee, I will stick with this id and discard the other id.

Decline reason:

After requesting input, the consensus is that this edit was you editing in violation of your block. Because of this, I am declining your request at this time. The standard offer is open to you:

1. Wait at least six months, without sockpuppetry or block evasion.
2. Promise to avoid the behavior that led to the block/ban.
3. Don't create any extraordinary reasons to object to a return.

--Chris (talk) 23:36, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

---

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.

It sounds like you are claiming that you haven't edited since this account was blocked, though this edit appears to be you editing while logged out, less than two months ago. Is this true? --Chris (talk) 22:46, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

To Chris: I edited this page much long ago using this account and the other account I accidentally created. This became the reason of blocking. I do not have any other accounts and have not made any edits since then. It seems that the more recent one you are referring to is not from me. Tseung kang 99 (talk) 03:54, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

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).

Tseung kang 99 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I have not edit that page. That IP is not mine as well. I already abides to Wiki rule for almost six months. What should I do then to unblock this account then?? Can you at least set the deadline for unblock of this account?

Decline reason:

It appears to me that several people have already invested significant effort in evaluating your contributions and determining the attribution of material you have contributed anonymously and under other identities. If you wish to return in six months to request the standard offer, you may do so. I do not recommend that you make additional unblock requests before then. UninvitedCompany 22:35, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

---

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 is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Tseung kang 99 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

UTRS appeal #27497 was submitted on Nov 06, 2019 16:47:38. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 16:47, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

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).

Tseung kang 99 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I have been blocked since Dec 2018 and have waited for ~1 year for my account to be unblocked. Please review my unblock request with full consideration. I am well aware that I violated rules regarding the use of multiple accounts and addition of copyright violations issues. As noted to the arbitration committee earlier, these happened because I was new to the platform. I will abide to the rules of Wikipedia moving forward.

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only. This unblock request has been open for more than two weeks but has not proven sufficient for any reviewing administrator to take action. You are welcome to request a new block review if you substantially reword your request. Yamla (talk) 13:25, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

---

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).

Tseung kang 99 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I have been blocked since Dec 2018 and have waited for ~1 year for my account to be unblocked as suggested by arbitraion committee. I am well aware that I violated rules regarding the use of multiple accounts and addition of copyright violations issues. As noted to the arbitration committee earlier, these happened because I was new to the platform. I will abide to the rules of Wikipedia moving forward. Please review my unblock request with full consideration. I will abide to the rules of Wikipedia moving forward.Yamla If you need more information from me, please specify in detail and I will supplement.

Decline reason:

Nothing in this or any of the other unblock requests indicates an understanding of copyright sufficient to prevent a recurrence of the past problems. And that's not even considering your creation of sockpuppet accounts after you had been blocked for sockpuppetry - you cannot claim that you thought that was OK. Huon (talk) 02:25, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

---

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).

Tseung kang 99 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

OK. Huon If you review my previous comments, I described and acknowledged my unintentional sockpuppet behavior and was told to wait for 6 mth from arbitration committee and now it has been ~1 year now. It all happened because I did not remember my previous account and was new to Wiki. Please suggest what I should do to get it unblocked. Arbitration committee says one thing and another member says different thing, and the criteria seem vague and unclear to me. It takes a few weeks to get my request to be reviewed and I keep have to submit my request and reviewed by different members with different criteria. Please suggest a clear guideline to get it unblocked.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Tseung kang 99 (talk • contribs) 20:26, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only. This unblock request has been open for more than two weeks but has not proven sufficient for any reviewing administrator to take action. You are welcome to request a new block review if you substantially reword your request. Yamla (talk) 14:10, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

---

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.

I think it would help if you gave us some idea that you understand the policies in question (WP:SOCK and WP:COPYVIO). That's probably why it's taking so long for your unblock requests to be reviewed, and why you're having so much trouble getting unblocked. If you could summarize them in your own words, that would help to show that you understand them. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:48, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

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).

Tseung kang 99 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

If you review my previous comments, I described and acknowledged my unintentional sockpuppet behavior and was told to wait for 6 mth from Arbitration committee and now it has been more than 1 year now. It all happened because I did not remember my previous account and was new to Wiki. I keep requesting the unblock request but it gets procedural-declined because no one reviews my request. Please suggest what I should do to get it unblocked. I asked for help on wikipedia-en-help chat page, and User:Eman235 advised me summarize my issue. Following are the descriptions of the rules I broke: I understand and admit that I violated WP:SOCK by creating another account because I was new to Wiki and forgot my id and created a new account although there was existing one. I understand and admit that I violated WP:COPYVIO by using photos used by another owner, which I should've avoided this and use photos which I own copyright.

Decline reason:

This doesn't address anything that has been raised on your talk page – in particular, you've ignored what I said to do in your next unblock request. Talk page access revoked to prevent further time-wasting. If you want to try again, summarize WP:SOCK and WP:COPYVIO in your own words via WP:UTRS. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:39, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

---

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.

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

---

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If the block is a CheckUser or Oversight block, was made by the Arbitration Committee or to enforce an arbitration decision (arbitration enforcement), or is unsuitable for public discussion, you should appeal to the Arbitration Committee.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

Tseung kang 99 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I was new to Wiki and admit that it is my fault. This is why I accepted to wait 6 month to get it unblocked. Now, it is well over 1 year since the block. I cross-checked my description of the rules with another admin User:Eman235 via wiki chat and User:Deepfriedokra on UTRS, and let me know if User:NinjaRobotPirate or other admin is happy about it. Yamla, I was Procedural declined twice already each taking +1mth get the reply; I really hope you can answer to this request without another procedural decline.

• Regarding WP:SOCK/WP:COPYVIO Summary

a. WP:SOCK: One should remain to only one account and not create multiple accounts to avoid detection, mislead other members in wiki, and violate community standards and policies. One should not use multiple accounts to make problematic edits, and when using same IP, it is recommended to declare such connections for different accounts. An editor may be allowed to use multiple accounts for valid reasons , but he or she should list all accounts with proper descriptions of its purpose. Editing while logged out is fine but must not actively use it to deceive the community. Others may register alternative account for legitaimate reasons too: security at public domain, privacy issue with controversial issue, doppelgänger accounts to prevent impersonation, clean start, username violation, compromised account, humorous alternative accounts, inaccessable due to technical issues, admin designated roles, or teaching. Editors should provide links between the accounts. Regarding meatpuppetry, for high-profile disputes, consensus should not be based upon vote counts ideally. Some may recruit new editors to influence decisions, but the concensus should be based on policy-related points made by editors. Arbitration committee may get involved for the purpose of dispute resolution. Sock puppets are usually detected by voluntary reportingand CheckUser tool from Wiki that checks IP addresses. The account will get blocked and tagged.

b. WPL COPYVIO: Other than items listed for No rights reserved, CC BY-SA and GFDL, one should get permission for release of original content to Wiki and its downstream users from not only from Wiki but also from origianl copyright holder, and place correct attribution to it not entitled to royalties or compensation. It is best to contact the copyright holders to provide something like CC BY-SA and GFDL so that content may be used at Wiki. There is a template for request letter for confirmation at "Wikipedia:Example requests for permission" page. When you share your own text, you can licence to public for redistribution under CC BY-SA and GFDL. Most of media already has the copyright, so one needs to contact original holder for permission unless the media is explicitly available to public or licensed under CC BY-SA and GFDL. On same cases abiding to fair use guidelines, you may use it regardless of copyright claims. Also, if one may import media with a compatible license, but cites its sources and provides attribution credit to the original author. The content shared in Wikimedia, a non-profit organization, may apprear in digital encyclopedia or books, and people may donate media to Wikimedia Commons. If editors who repeatedly violate copyright rules will be blocked.

Notes:

• In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
• Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=I was new to Wiki and admit that it is my fault. This is why I accepted to wait 6 month to get it unblocked. Now, it is well over 1 year since the block. I cross-checked my description of the rules with another admin [[User:Eman235]] via wiki chat and [[User:Deepfriedokra]] on UTRS, and let me know if [[User:NinjaRobotPirate]] or other admin is happy about it. [[User:Yamla|Yamla]], I was Procedural declined twice already each taking +1mth get the reply; I really hope you can answer to this request without another procedural decline. * Regarding WP:SOCK/WP:COPYVIO Summary a. WP:SOCK: One should remain to only one account and not create multiple accounts to avoid detection, mislead other members in wiki, and violate community standards and policies. One should not use multiple accounts to make problematic edits, and when using same IP, it is recommended to declare such connections for different accounts. An editor may be allowed to use multiple accounts for valid reasons , but he or she should list all accounts with proper descriptions of its purpose. Editing while logged out is fine but must not actively use it to deceive the community. Others may register alternative account for legitaimate reasons too: security at public domain, privacy issue with controversial issue, doppelgänger accounts to prevent impersonation, clean start, username violation, compromised account, humorous alternative accounts, inaccessable due to technical issues, admin designated roles, or teaching. Editors should provide links between the accounts. Regarding meatpuppetry, for high-profile disputes, consensus should not be based upon vote counts ideally. Some may recruit new editors to influence decisions, but the concensus should be based on policy-related points made by editors. Arbitration committee may get involved for the purpose of dispute resolution. Sock puppets are usually detected by voluntary reportingand CheckUser tool from Wiki that checks IP addresses. The account will get blocked and tagged. b. WPL COPYVIO: Other than items listed for No rights reserved, CC BY-SA and GFDL, one should get permission for release of original content to Wiki and its downstream users from not only from Wiki but also from origianl copyright holder, and place correct attribution to it not entitled to royalties or compensation. It is best to contact the copyright holders to provide something like CC BY-SA and GFDL so that content may be used at Wiki. There is a template for request letter for confirmation at "Wikipedia:Example requests for permission" page. When you share your own text, you can licence to public for redistribution under CC BY-SA and GFDL. Most of media already has the copyright, so one needs to contact original holder for permission unless the media is explicitly available to public or licensed under CC BY-SA and GFDL. On same cases abiding to fair use guidelines, you may use it regardless of copyright claims. Also, if one may import media with a compatible license, but cites its sources and provides attribution credit to the original author. The content shared in Wikimedia, a non-profit organization, may apprear in digital encyclopedia or books, and people may donate media to Wikimedia Commons. If editors who repeatedly violate copyright rules will be blocked. |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=I was new to Wiki and admit that it is my fault. This is why I accepted to wait 6 month to get it unblocked. Now, it is well over 1 year since the block. I cross-checked my description of the rules with another admin [[User:Eman235]] via wiki chat and [[User:Deepfriedokra]] on UTRS, and let me know if [[User:NinjaRobotPirate]] or other admin is happy about it. [[User:Yamla|Yamla]], I was Procedural declined twice already each taking +1mth get the reply; I really hope you can answer to this request without another procedural decline. * Regarding WP:SOCK/WP:COPYVIO Summary a. WP:SOCK: One should remain to only one account and not create multiple accounts to avoid detection, mislead other members in wiki, and violate community standards and policies. One should not use multiple accounts to make problematic edits, and when using same IP, it is recommended to declare such connections for different accounts. An editor may be allowed to use multiple accounts for valid reasons , but he or she should list all accounts with proper descriptions of its purpose. Editing while logged out is fine but must not actively use it to deceive the community. Others may register alternative account for legitaimate reasons too: security at public domain, privacy issue with controversial issue, doppelgänger accounts to prevent impersonation, clean start, username violation, compromised account, humorous alternative accounts, inaccessable due to technical issues, admin designated roles, or teaching. Editors should provide links between the accounts. Regarding meatpuppetry, for high-profile disputes, consensus should not be based upon vote counts ideally. Some may recruit new editors to influence decisions, but the concensus should be based on policy-related points made by editors. Arbitration committee may get involved for the purpose of dispute resolution. Sock puppets are usually detected by voluntary reportingand CheckUser tool from Wiki that checks IP addresses. The account will get blocked and tagged. b. WPL COPYVIO: Other than items listed for No rights reserved, CC BY-SA and GFDL, one should get permission for release of original content to Wiki and its downstream users from not only from Wiki but also from origianl copyright holder, and place correct attribution to it not entitled to royalties or compensation. It is best to contact the copyright holders to provide something like CC BY-SA and GFDL so that content may be used at Wiki. There is a template for request letter for confirmation at "Wikipedia:Example requests for permission" page. When you share your own text, you can licence to public for redistribution under CC BY-SA and GFDL. Most of media already has the copyright, so one needs to contact original holder for permission unless the media is explicitly available to public or licensed under CC BY-SA and GFDL. On same cases abiding to fair use guidelines, you may use it regardless of copyright claims. Also, if one may import media with a compatible license, but cites its sources and provides attribution credit to the original author. The content shared in Wikimedia, a non-profit organization, may apprear in digital encyclopedia or books, and people may donate media to Wikimedia Commons. If editors who repeatedly violate copyright rules will be blocked. |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=I was new to Wiki and admit that it is my fault. This is why I accepted to wait 6 month to get it unblocked. Now, it is well over 1 year since the block. I cross-checked my description of the rules with another admin [[User:Eman235]] via wiki chat and [[User:Deepfriedokra]] on UTRS, and let me know if [[User:NinjaRobotPirate]] or other admin is happy about it. [[User:Yamla|Yamla]], I was Procedural declined twice already each taking +1mth get the reply; I really hope you can answer to this request without another procedural decline. * Regarding WP:SOCK/WP:COPYVIO Summary a. WP:SOCK: One should remain to only one account and not create multiple accounts to avoid detection, mislead other members in wiki, and violate community standards and policies. One should not use multiple accounts to make problematic edits, and when using same IP, it is recommended to declare such connections for different accounts. An editor may be allowed to use multiple accounts for valid reasons , but he or she should list all accounts with proper descriptions of its purpose. Editing while logged out is fine but must not actively use it to deceive the community. Others may register alternative account for legitaimate reasons too: security at public domain, privacy issue with controversial issue, doppelgänger accounts to prevent impersonation, clean start, username violation, compromised account, humorous alternative accounts, inaccessable due to technical issues, admin designated roles, or teaching. Editors should provide links between the accounts. Regarding meatpuppetry, for high-profile disputes, consensus should not be based upon vote counts ideally. Some may recruit new editors to influence decisions, but the concensus should be based on policy-related points made by editors. Arbitration committee may get involved for the purpose of dispute resolution. Sock puppets are usually detected by voluntary reportingand CheckUser tool from Wiki that checks IP addresses. The account will get blocked and tagged. b. WPL COPYVIO: Other than items listed for No rights reserved, CC BY-SA and GFDL, one should get permission for release of original content to Wiki and its downstream users from not only from Wiki but also from origianl copyright holder, and place correct attribution to it not entitled to royalties or compensation. It is best to contact the copyright holders to provide something like CC BY-SA and GFDL so that content may be used at Wiki. There is a template for request letter for confirmation at "Wikipedia:Example requests for permission" page. When you share your own text, you can licence to public for redistribution under CC BY-SA and GFDL. Most of media already has the copyright, so one needs to contact original holder for permission unless the media is explicitly available to public or licensed under CC BY-SA and GFDL. On same cases abiding to fair use guidelines, you may use it regardless of copyright claims. Also, if one may import media with a compatible license, but cites its sources and provides attribution credit to the original author. The content shared in Wikimedia, a non-profit organization, may apprear in digital encyclopedia or books, and people may donate media to Wikimedia Commons. If editors who repeatedly violate copyright rules will be blocked. |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}