User talk:Xi Xing Ping

July 2021

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Arjun (tank), disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. ----Rdp060707|talk 09:08, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Helios007 per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Helios007. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. - TheresNoTime ^😺 09:39, 31 July 2021 (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).

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

Request reason:

there's no strong evidence to suggest the claim made by formaldude and Echo1Charlie,I have just copied the claims made by Helios007 if u have any strong evidence to suggest me then u may go ahead, there's been no rule to my knowledge that prevents the users from editing the right one which is based on other editiors. If u find any spamming or any vandilism then I would accept the block, so the block is unnecessary.

Decline reason:

You are blocked for abusing multiple accounts. This is based on behavioral and technical evidence. HighInBC ^{Need help? Just ask.} 10:08, 31 July 2021 (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 is asking that their block be reviewed:

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

Request reason:

MY EDITS ARE ALL BASED ON HELIOS007 not the same! , I have copied the same thing apart from that if u found anything strong then provide that, all those proofs provided by [Echo1Charlie]] and formal dude are based on assumption ONLY. As I told before all my edits are cut copy paste from the past. So,the block is unnecessary ]

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=MY EDITS ARE ALL BASED ON [[HELIOS007]] not the same! , I have copied the same thing apart from that if u found anything strong then provide that, all those proofs provided by [Echo1Charlie]] and formal dude are based on assumption ONLY. As I told before all my edits are cut copy paste from the past. So,the block is unnecessary ] |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=MY EDITS ARE ALL BASED ON [[HELIOS007]] not the same! , I have copied the same thing apart from that if u found anything strong then provide that, all those proofs provided by [Echo1Charlie]] and formal dude are based on assumption ONLY. As I told before all my edits are cut copy paste from the past. So,the block is unnecessary ] |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=MY EDITS ARE ALL BASED ON [[HELIOS007]] not the same! , I have copied the same thing apart from that if u found anything strong then provide that, all those proofs provided by [Echo1Charlie]] and formal dude are based on assumption ONLY. As I told before all my edits are cut copy paste from the past. So,the block is unnecessary ] |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

Xi Xing Ping (talk) 10:14, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What about User:Indiana James 007? Same edit as Helios, same 007, same edit as you. Also a checkuser confirmed this. Also you all speak english the same way. HighInBC ^{Need help? Just ask.} 10:16, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

HighInBC could u answer my question??? Indiana_James_007 is one of my account, but the reasons are not strong enough, to link this with Helios 007. Xi Xing Ping (talk) 10:21, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

HighInBC just got tired of Wikipedia, anyone could block anyone by pointing out stupid reasons Echo1Charlie. Xi Xing Ping (talk) 10:23, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]