User talk:ChronoTexts

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/DancingFountain. 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.

Izno (talk) 18:11, 21 November 2025 (UTC)

{{unblock| Thank you for the guidance. I would like to address the three points requested.

First, I understand that my editing merited a block because some of my activity or account behavior appeared irregular in a way that raised concerns under Wikipedia’s account integrity and sockpuppetry policies. I acknowledge that my editing patterns may have unintentionally contributed to this, and I accept responsibility for not being more careful in strictly following account-use expectations. I apologize for any disruption this may have caused to the Wikipedia community.

Second, going forward I will maintain clear adherence to all account-conduct policies, avoid any editing behavior that could be misinterpreted as improper, and stay within transparent, well-defined editing practices. I will be more mindful of how my edits appear from a policy perspective. I am also willing to edit under supervision or restrictions if needed.

Third, regarding constructive editing: my goal is to continue contributing to broad, educational topics such as animals, science, ongoing social issues, cars, and general history. Since joining in September, I have made nearly 200 good-faith edits and participated in the Asia Wikipedia contest. My intention has always been to contribute positively and learn as I go.

This is my only account, and the only one I wish to use. I now fully understand the expectations around account conduct and will follow all policies carefully. I simply hope to continue contributing constructively to Wikipedia.

Thank you for considering my request ~~~~}} ChronoTexts (talk) 19:50, 24 November 2025 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

Thank you for the guidance. I would like to address the three points requested.

First, I understand that my editing merited a block because some of my activity or account behavior appeared irregular in a way that raised concerns under Wikipedia’s account integrity and sockpuppetry policies. I acknowledge that my editing patterns may have unintentionally contributed to this, and I accept responsibility for not being more careful in strictly following account-use expectations. I apologize for any disruption this may have caused to the Wikipedia community.

Second, going forward I will maintain clear adherence to all account-conduct policies, avoid any editing behavior that could be misinterpreted as improper, and stay within transparent, well-defined editing practices. I will be more mindful of how my edits appear from a policy perspective. I am also willing to edit under supervision or restrictions if needed.

Third, regarding constructive editing: my goal is to continue contributing to broad, educational topics such as animals, science, ongoing social issues, cars, and general history. Since joining in September, I have made nearly 200 good-faith edits and participated in the Asia Wikipedia contest. My intention has always been to contribute positively and learn as I go.

This is my only account, and the only one I wish to use. I now fully understand the expectations around account conduct and will follow all policies carefully. I simply hope to continue contributing constructively to Wikipedia.

Thank you for considering my request. ChronoTexts (talk) 19:51, 24 November 2025 (UTC)

Decline reason:

This is clearly a UPE/scam account. You will not be unblocked. asilvering (talk) 03:13, 28 November 2025 (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.

ChronoTexts (talk) 19:51, 24 November 2025 (UTC)

If FirstPlace17 and Thequillworks aren't you, who are they? -- asilvering (talk) 02:43, 25 November 2025 (UTC)

I understand why those accounts raised concerns. At this point, my focus is entirely on complying with account policies going forward, ensuring I follow every guideline. ChronoTexts is the only account I intend to use, and I won’t be using or accessing any other accounts. I’m committed to editing constructively from this single account only and hope to move forward under that commitment. ChronoTexts (talk) 18:35, 25 November 2025 (UTC)

(Non-administrator comment) Are you using AI/LLM/chatbot tools to write this for you? You're not answering the questions you've been asked and the tone really looks like you're using tools instead of writing this yourself.

See WP:NICETRY for an explanation of why this is a bad idea and answer asilvering's question properly, this time in your own words. Blue Sonnet (talk) 23:38, 27 November 2025 (UTC)

@Blue-Sonnet @Asilvering

Hi, thank you for giving me the chance to clarify, I went through WP:NICETRY and have understood the situation. I’m not great at writing these kinds of replies, and I think my earlier answers came out wrong because I was overthinking them. Let me explain it simply and directly so there is complete transparency and we are on the same page with complete honesty.

When I first started editing, I created and tried out a couple of accounts because I didn’t really understand Wikipedia’s rules about multiple accounts or how strict they were. I wasn’t trying to deceive anyone or going against the Wikipedia Guidlines, I was just experimenting as a new editor, and I now understand that this ended up looking like sockpuppetry. That was my mistake. My intention was to only become a experienced editor on Wikipedia and maybe attend the Wikimedia Global Event coming up :).

I understand why the block happened. I know now that I should only be using one account, and that account is ChronoTexts. I won’t be using or creating any others. If needed, I’m okay with restrictions or supervision. I just want the chance to edit normally and contribute productively, and I plan to use this account only and I have been reading and going through different Wikipedia Guidelines and have been learning more every day and plan to not disturb Encyclopedia.

Thank you for letting me explain this properly and I wish I am granted getting unblocked.

Much Love! ChronoTexts (talk) 01:56, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

Great, thanks for the clarification! Nine times out of ten, a request ending in "Thank you for considering my request" is generated by AI and we're unfortunately swamped by AI-generated appeals that aren't sincere.

I'll take you at your word, so disregard my post and thank you for providing further clarification - as I've mentioned, the appeals page is pretty backlogged, but an admin will review this as soon as they can.

Just to confirm, were the two accounts mentioned by asilvering yours originally? We still need to clear that up and an admin won't be able to proceed until you explicitly confirm that both of them belonged to you. Blue Sonnet (talk) 02:21, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

@Blue-Sonnet

No worries, and thank you for pointing that out. I really did write my reply myself. The ending phrase is just something I’m used to from work emails. Sorry if it sounded formal or caused any confusion.

To answer your question clearly: yes, both of those accounts were created by me when I was new and didn’t understand the rules about multiple accounts. I wasn’t trying to avoid anything or deceive anyone, I was just experimenting as a beginner, and I stopped using them once I learned it wasn’t allowed, and understood I was causing issues.

ChronoTexts is the only account I want to use going forward. I’m completely fine with the other accounts being closed or removed. I just want to move forward properly and contribute from this one account.

Thanks! ChronoTexts (talk) 02:28, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

@Blue-Sonnet, I really appreciate your good faith and your efforts to help this editor, but I think you'll probably change your mind if you see . This is impersonation of an administrator, a pretty common UPE scam, and I'm amazed they weren't blocked for it earlier. -- asilvering (talk) 03:12, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

Heh, I was just looking at the claim that someone had taken control of the original account and was about to ask since that was really weird - at least we got written admission of the earlier accounts being related (although I'm sure you knew that already). Blue Sonnet (talk) 03:16, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Draft:Leland L. Fairbanks, M.D. requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia, as it exhibits signs of having been generated by an AI model with no clear human review. Text produced by these applications can be unsuitable for an encyclopedia and output must be carefully checked. For further information, see the section G15 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think these signs were incorrectly identified and you assert that you did carefully check the content, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Additionally – if you would like to create an article but find it difficult, please ask for help at the Teahouse. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 22:33, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Hello, ChronoTexts. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Neil Cannon, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 13:11, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, ChronoTexts. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Neil "nelly" Cannon, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 22:10, 16 March 2026 (UTC)