User talk:Roz Lipschitz

Welcome!

Hello, Roz Lipschitz, 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 messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome!

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 19:59, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

HENCE, ROZ LIPSHITS IS AN IDIOT!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.104.150.88 (talk) 14:25, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No Explaination yet BLOCKED?! Please Advise me!

Request to be unblocked:

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).

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

Request reason:

I AM NOT working with SOCKPUPPETS THOUGH MY IP ADDRESS HAS MULTIPLE USERS + I realize there was a question about this in the past (over 1 year ago!); I AM WILLING TO TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION TO FOLLOW Wikipedia GUIDLINES & be productive also see supporting reasons/intentions below

Decline reason:

The user who blocked you is a checkuser. I'd assume (although I am not certain) that there is some technical evidence suggesting that you are or were abusing multiple accounts, namely this account, which was blocked as well. — Rjd0060 (talk) 05:59, 23 November 2008 (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.

.

For whatever reason, I am currently blocked! The message I am receiving is that my IP Address has been abled by Sam Korn. Then, there is a message stating, "resuming previous sockpuppetry & disruption"

I do not get this. If am using a wireless IP that many different users are on. It is possible that some one else from this IP is disrupting. It is really hard for me to tell but I am certainly happy to try and find out.

I also do not feel that I have been disruptive. Everything I have edited I have put an explaination as to why I made an edit and I have put explainations with links to probably sources on the Talk Pages.

Jokestress, even just gave me a suggestion that I create a new article and move MOST of my discussion over to that new article's discussion page. HOWEVER, when I attempted to do this I found that I was blocked.

When I searched for reasons that I am blocked (and I feel I deserve a specific reason + to have had a warning beforehand) I cannot find anything. I WISH FOR THIS BLOCK TO BE APPEALED so I can follow Jokestress' advice and move my discussion to the appropriate page! I AM TRYING TO WORK WITH WIKIPEDIA ADMINISTRATORS and be a productive editor. I am trying to get the right information onto the right pages and to get the right updates or at least probable sources for them known by putting an idea or suggestion on Talk Pages. I believe Jokestress is an admintator.

Can this block please be lifted and any important instructions / guidlines be given to me. It is not my intention to use sockpuppets (I was accused of that a LONG time ago, for whatever reason.) Thank you; I am willing to do whatever it takes to get this confusion and misunderstanding cleared up. Roz Lipschitz (talk) 19:26, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The lack of notice isn't itself a problem, as - if you were a sockpuppet - the master account would be the one receiving the notice. I'll request clarification from the blocking admin. UltraExactZZ ^Claims~ Evidence 20:51, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

True I had a 6 month block by DUROVA who is no longer a Wikipedia Administrator way back in October of 2007 for sock puppets (I feel I was more of a victim in that case but was burned out and did not argue this!) Recently, that block was lifted and I have had no problems. Then I asked why the Paul Baresi article was not avail for edit.

I worked on that and feelthat Jokestress and I were cooperating in getting the citations imporved. We did not see eye to eye on one paragraph. She (Jokestress) expressed her reasons and then I reviewed them and decided to agree with her. I posted a LONG discussion for my support of Jokestress and suggested that Drama, insults and editing wars of the past SHOULD be avoided in the Barresi article and a possible new article. Jokestress suggested in the discussion that I start the article and move most of my LONG DISCUSSION over to that page. I attempted to do so and realized I am blocked! If I am being accused of sock puppetry then I must state that probably someone is ahold of my password and signing in as me and using the puppets. I ad mit because my IP which is also blocked has many users that someone MAY have gotten my password off a browse. But, I have gone over my editing history and feel I have been productive for several months and if Sock Puppetry has been going on for these months then it would have been only fair to warn me. I see nothing that suggests sock puppets but I am definitly curious to know sho I can fix the problem! PLEASE HELP ME!!!! I am not editiing under any other accounts at all! I have not for a VERY LONG TIME!!! I do feel I deserve to be informed as to exactly where and when the alleged sock puppetry has occurred! This is only fair because if sock puppets are active I am UNAWARE of it but willing to work with Wikipedia admin to find out if it is indeed coming from someone I know (which is likely based on the history)! Roz Lipschitz (talk) 21:10, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If someone used your password, then disruptive edits would show up as coming from your account. You'd have to look at your edits to judge if there are any edits listed that you didn't do. If you had sockpuppet accounts at one time, and those were compromised, then that could be stickier - a list of those accounts might help track down the compromised username, and also to show that they were not being used for editing in contravention of policy. If someone who shares your IP is editing in a way that matches your own (Same articles, same tone, same subjects, etc), and if the times match your editing patterns, then it may be viewed as Meatpuppetry, which is treated as if all of the accounts were used by one editor. Until we have clarification from the blocking admin, though, I decline to speculate. UltraExactZZ ^Claims~ Evidence 21:36, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have looked at everyone of my edits of the past 6 months and found nothing disruptive and only two very short things which have been changed... I tried looking at other edits on the pages I worked on to see if someone was trying to mimic me. Honestly, I have no idea. I did not previously know what Meat Puppet meant so thanks for explaining. I honestly do know if I am part of a meat puppet. Though I now believe that the last time I was accused of being a part of a sock puppet, I was indeed a victim of Meat Puppetry. If Meat Puppetry is going on, then it is without my knowledge. AGAIN, I am more than happy to help Wikipedia by doing my share in finding out who is doing this. The problem is that I have no example of what types which edits are in question... Please give me at least 3 examples because based on that I might be able to find the person based on tones, styles etc of people I know. Thank! Roz Lipschitz (talk) 23:24, 20 November 2008 (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).

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

Request reason:

Assuming that there is evidence against me and whether or not there really is are two different things. I assure you that there is no such evidence against me! I have not used sock puppets though I have been now accused of this twice. I feel it only fair to see the "evidence against me! Roz Lipschitz (talk) 17:57, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Please wait for the blocking user's comment. Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP! :D} 05:11, 24 November 2008 (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).

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

Request reason:

Requesting this "evidence" tha tSam Korn who will not communicate with me supposedlyy has against me. The Administrator above who declined my request to unblock says he only "assumes" that there is said evidence. I have a right to know what this evidence is because I am 100% sure that there is no such evidence. I have been accused twice now of sock puppets which I have not done yet I get accused and blocked without any supporting evidence! This is very unfair!

Decline reason:

Please wait until a checkuser comments. How many people, approximately, use this address? Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP! :D} 05:11, 24 November 2008 (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.

.

Glancing at the link at my denial to unblock, Ihave no idea who "rednath" is. However, I do feel that evience should be presented to me as to why I am accused to being linked to this other user. My current IP is used by many people. I was instructed to not use the IP and to create a user account. I did this but aparantly this is not good enough for Wikipedia. Assumed evidence is not a good enough reason. I have requested to see examples of this "evidence" which I have a right to. Please provide me with evidence or assist me in rectifying this situation. Thank you. Roz Lipschitz (talk) 18:06, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you have no idea who Rednath is, why are they editing from your IP address? – Luna Santin (talk) 05:37, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know exactly why rednath is using my IP address but as I have explained many individuals have been using this IP. This is a wireless serrvice and many have been able to log onto it. We are making the service a security enabled one due to this problem. My guess would have been 8 people use this IP. Again as a wireless service, I cannot change the IP. I can set it up so that I am protected with a password and no one else can log on (at least not without my permission.) I also feel that I deserve some sort of evidence that rednath or others are indeed logging on and meat puppeting because I am not a sock puppet. Please help me figure this out by at least giving me examples of times and dates when this activity occurred. Thank you. Roz Lipschitz (talk) 21:24, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have been asked to wait until the Check User comments; is he ever going to comment? I have not used sock puppets and reading the Wikipedia policies I feel that an administrator is purposely trying to block me of spite and is making it about sock puppets which I am not doing! Roz Lipschitz (talk) 01:10, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ROZ LIPSCHITZ IS BLOCKED BECAUSE HE IS AN IDIOT! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.104.150.88 (talk) 14:27, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please porvide me with Checkuser comments and/or mentioned 'Technical evidence'

I am at a loss as to why it has been over a month but 1 Adminsitrator asked me to be patiend until "Technical Evidence" was found. Another user asked me to wait for comments from "CheckUSER"

I truly feel that I was blocked mistakenly. If not can I please see "Checkuser comments and/or Technical Evidnce?"

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).

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

Request reason:

I was told that I would receive 'technical evidence' a/or 'the CHECKUSER' Commments. At least 2 Administrators have tried to help me get to the bottom of this without any feedback from the Checkuser who blocked me. I feel that I deserve an explaination and that I was blocked vendictively or purely by mistake. Can someone please give me atleast 1 REASON for this circumstance; I feel that this in only fair. Also, I have stated numerous times that I am willing and able to work with Wikipedia to see that others do not use my IP - I have already taken many measures

Decline reason:

Due to Wikimedia's privacy policy, CheckUsers won't say your IPs unless you agree to reveal it yourself. Based on technical and behavioral evidence, the CUs have good reason to believe you were abusing multiple accounts and IPs. A direct IP hit on Rednath (talk · contribs) (an account bearing a strong resemblance to your edits with the same article interests) seems convincing. — Spellcast (talk) 21:29, 29 December 2008 (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.

You might as well give up.

Seriously - you're running into the typical wikipedian abusive-administrator problems, like the great <a href="http://parkerpeters.livejournal.com/3130.html">"Nobody new ever comes" idea</a>, and their usual <a href="http://parkerpeters.livejournal.com/1882.html">abuse and gloat</a> mode. The chance of Sam Korn actually speaking to you? Next to zero. Remember, if he just keeps his mouth shut, nobody else is ever allowed to do anything, and nobody will ever doublecheck to find out if he told the truth or not anyways.

Might I suggest heading over to <a href="http://www.wikipediareview.com">Wikipedia Review</a> as well, you'll find a whole host of people who've been abused by people like Sam Korn.

I really wouldn't ever expect ANY fairness out of this crowd, seriously. The idea that one of them was EVER wrong never occurs to them, and anyone who suggest differently is "obviously" either a banned user, or a "troublemaker" to be banned merely for speaking up.

Good luck anyways, but beware - even if you just make a new username and try to contribute in the areas of your interest/specialty, you'll be labeled a "sockpuppet" and blocked again... hell, they make a habit of picking a pet topic and making it so that anyone who edits on it (and even those who don't but just run up against one of their POV-pusher friends, see User:OWL-FELLS or User:PSPMario or User:Pukachu) is tarred and feathered as a "sockpuppet" with no proof and no way to ever defend themselves. I'm actually surprised your talk page isn't locked, that's their favored other tactic for hiding their abuse under the rug: lock down the talkpage and prevent the person they're abusing from speaking in their own defense at all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.30.207.143 (talk) 03:10, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]