Welcome![edit]

Hello, NorthernBladeLights9, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits to the page FIGat7th did not conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may have been removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations verified in reliable, reputable print or online sources or in other reliable media. Always provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to The Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need personal help ask me on my talk page, or ask a question on your talk page. Again, welcome.  10mmsocket (talk) 06:55, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@10mmsocket Alright, I will contribute better in a meantime if I learned the tutorial. NorthernBladeLights9 (talk) 17:22, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Your multiple accounts will likely be locked in the next few hours, so your best bet is simply walk away and reflect for a year or so on whether you are capable of acceptable behaviour and want to abide by our rules and standards. 10mmsocket (talk) 17:25, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What does reflect mean? Why do I really need to walk away for one year, will a lock be temporary? And can you help me on Wikipedia? I asked this type of question on Teahouse. NorthernBladeLights9 (talk) 17:44, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet[edit]

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively as a sockpuppet of User:Fort Visitor Across per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Fort Visitor Across. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.
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.
-- RoySmith (talk) 23:47, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Appeal #1[edit]

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).

NorthernBladeLights9 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

What in the world is this? My block is unfair and incorrect at all. I never made a high amount of contributions on this site unlike other editors. I have asked great questions on Teahouse like before. Also, I’m a completely different person similar to other editors and newcomers and I never deserve to be brought to SPIs and a checkuser. There is no way you all have the ability to do this. And I recently help on improving articles and pages by editing them. I have a unique personality and interest just like Bioediting1112345 and Pointway2846. And that is it. The user who was blocked, never abuse multiple accounts, they are just individuals who are fully and totally different. NorthernBladeLights9 (talk) 08:28, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

My use of the checkuser tool confirms that you have abused multiple accounts. PhilKnight (talk) 11:16, 20 May 2023 (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.

NorthernBladeLights9 (talk) 08:28, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

More