User talk:Chuckfinley94

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. 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 believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 21:17, 19 April 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).

Chuckfinley94 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log) • SI)

Request reason:

I just received an e-mail from Some1 about suspected continued abuse. As I previously noted from drew88ski, I apologize for my lack of understanding and now that I have come to understand the issue, I have ceased using any other accounts. I would like to reinstate this as my single account and continue making good faith contributions to the platform.

Decline reason:

See conversation below. The accounts are plainly connected in some way and I do not find denying all connection remotely credible. -- asilvering (talk) 17:53, 1 June 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.

By "e-mail", I presume they meant a ping (to their Drew88ski sock) to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Chuckfinley94. To the reviewing admin: This unblock request came immediately after Chuckfinley94 was caught socking with Patcholive, an account created six hours after an admin declined their unblock request on Drew88ski . Some1 (talk) 18:24, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

To the reviewing admin: This unblock request came in direct response to a notification I received from Some1, alleging that I was socking with Patcholive. I am not related to this Patcholive account. I acknowledge an admin did decline my unblock request on Drew88ski because it was a request made improperly: that I should not have requested Drew88ski be unblocked but instead file the request for the primary subject of the issue, Chuckfinley94. As I stated in that request and again here: I did not understand the problem with my management of multiple accounts at the time. Once I was made aware of the issue, I ceased the attempted use of multiple accounts and tried to start totally fresh with a single, new account (Drew88ski). That account was then blocked as part of Some1's pursuit. I did not understand that my move *should* have been to straighten this out and pursue single-account usage from the original source account (Chuckfinley94). That is what brings us to this moment, where I am respectfully requesting that this user account be unblocked. I'm totally fine with it being placed on probation or whatever the reviewers deem appropriate: I simply ask for the chance to prove that I can be a positive contributor to the community. I have learned from my previous errors and will not make those same mistakes. Chuckfinley94 (talk) 18:32, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

I am not related to this Patcholive account. A wp:checkuser confirmed that you are related per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Chuckfinley94... Some1 (talk) 18:36, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

@PhilKnight, which account did you confirm Patcholive to? -- asilvering (talk) 23:22, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Patcholive shares an IP address with Chuckfinley94, Drew88ski, Discoverabilitydrew, KChao1964, and Siankea. PhilKnight (talk) 06:45, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Ok, @Chuckfinley94, that really does not look very good in light of your previous statement. Care to comment? -- asilvering (talk) 13:37, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

I agree on all but Patcholive - I really do not know how that would be possible, it doesn't make sense (at least, as I understand how these things work).

All I've got is that I learned the lesson here and I ask for a chance. Chuckfinley94 (talk) 13:47, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

You don't have to answer this (but if you decline to, please say so), but what kind of internet connection are you using? eg, office computer on work network, mobile data, home wifi, etc. -- asilvering (talk) 14:37, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

I primarily connect 1) at work, which is a big coworking space with several hundred people on a shareed WiFi, 2) at home in a large apartment building, and 3) in my apartment building common areas where we have a building-wide WiFi. I also sometimes tether via my cell phone. Chuckfinley94 (talk) 17:31, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Alright, well, if we accept that Patcholive is not you, that takes your COI regarding Sam Mangel from "highly likely" to "virtually certain". What's your relationship to the topics you've been editing about? -- asilvering (talk) 20:39, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

I don't really follow how that's the case but I'm not affiliated in any way, I'm just very interested in the area he works in and follow it daily. That's why many of my edits involve that sector, because I read those news stories and contribute when there's something new and noteworthy. Chuckfinley94 (talk) 14:19, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

No, that's not the slightest bit credible, so I'll be declining this request. -- asilvering (talk) 17:49, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

It is not surprising that Chuckfinley94 denies being Patcholive, because admitting that he created a sockpuppet account 6 hours after an admin declined his unblock request would be embarrassing. The Sam Mangel edit; the Visual edit Newcomer task tags similar to Drew88ski; similar edit summary styles, including the use of the phrase "copy cleanup": ; not to mention a checkuser confirming that they all share the same IP address.

It would also not be surprising if Chuckfinley94 denies having any COI, because admitting to one would mean that he may be prevented from editing articles that he's "interested in." I don't oppose him being unblocked (not that my opinion on this matters), but I do think he has a COI (and other editors apparently do too ), so it would be great if he's unblocked with some restrictions (voluntary or not). Some1 (talk) 21:40, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

Whatever kind of restriction the team thinks is appropriate is fine with me, I'd just like to contribute. I understand that how I was operating was inappropriate and won't do anything like that going forward. Please just let me know! Chuckfinley94 (talk) 14:21, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

Related Articles