User talk:Hound and Feline
Restoring edits from a blocked user
[edit]
Hello, Hound and Feline, welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. Your editing pattern indicates that you may be using multiple accounts or coordinating editing with people outside Wikipedia, such as Grasshalm (talk · contribs). Our policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow this, and users who misuse multiple accounts may be blocked from editing. If you operate multiple accounts directly or with the help of another person, please disclose these connections. Thank you. Belbury (talk) 07:33, 24 September 2025 (UTC)
- One of my friends told me to look at these pages, as the reverts didnt make them better, so that person who told me must have been a banned user now? AT the end of the day Its pretty irrelevant, we should look at the edits themselves and If they improved the page, not who made them. Hound and Feline (talk) 07:37, 24 September 2025 (UTC)
- Is someone asking me to take a look at these pages not allowed or what? Hound and Feline (talk) 07:38, 24 September 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, per WP:MEATPUPPET.
I've reverted the edits, please don't restore them again. Belbury (talk) 07:44, 24 September 2025 (UTC)A new user who engages in the same behavior as another user in the same context, and who appears to be editing Wikipedia solely for that purpose, may be subject to the remedies applied to the user whose behavior they are joining.
- I wont, but I noticed one thing, the pages just gopt worse when you copied the same revert tactic of some ip who reverted it before, dont you think wronging a random user is not as important as an articles accuracy and quality of sources? Its not only about wronging someone, but thousands of people will read the articles and miss out, or be feed unsourced information If instead of checking the articles yourself, you just mindlessly revert something an ip reverted before. I left a message on your talk page, because this is definetly bad behavior that damages wikipedia. Hound and Feline (talk) 07:53, 24 September 2025 (UTC)
- From now on, alölmy contributions will be on talk pages then, I will debate anyone If I deem something as inaccurate Hound and Feline (talk) 07:57, 24 September 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, per WP:MEATPUPPET.
- Is someone asking me to take a look at these pages not allowed or what? Hound and Feline (talk) 07:38, 24 September 2025 (UTC)
- How about you take a look at these pages and judge them? Hound and Feline (talk) 07:40, 24 September 2025 (UTC)
September 2025
[edit]
You are suspected of sockpuppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, then, if you wish to do so, respond to the evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Əzərbəyəniləri. Thank you. Belbury (talk) 08:04, 24 September 2025 (UTC)
- Pretty irrelevant, as Im not even the same person, but how about you respond to my arguments on your talk page? Hound and Feline (talk) 08:06, 24 September 2025 (UTC)
Blocked as a sockpuppet
[edit]
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 why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice:
{{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.