User talk:DanBritton

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

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 ~~~~}}.  Abecedare (talk) 18:09, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

• Administrator note Let me know if you are interested in editing articles unrelated to India-Pakistan and I will be willing to unblock you with a topic-ban from contentious India Pakistan Afghanistan area. Abecedare (talk) 18:12, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

  Why I was blocked in first case?

  What did I violate?? DanBritton (talk) 18:15, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

  Your editing and CU results indicate that you are a sock account. And jumping straight into a contentious topic area plagued with similar socks/SPAs is not helpful to building an encyclopedia. As I said above, if this is indeed a coincidence, you can ask to be unblocked to edit other areas of wikipedia. Let me know. Abecedare (talk) 18:19, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

  I intended to edit articles of war and defence, and I saw a hugh viewing in this page, so I started of from here. What is wrong here. I want my ban to be reapealed asap. It seems new users can't edit at all in Wikipedia as per their choice. DanBritton (talk) 18:25, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

  Question: Is this your first or only wikipedia account?

  Also, you can appeal your block by placing an unblock request ({{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}) as explained in the above block notice. Abecedare (talk) 18:30, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

  Yes, I joined Wikipedia today and you blocked me. Wait what how can 1 user have multiple Wikipedia accounts. I want my unblock asap, as I am not violating anything. DanBritton (talk) 18:33, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

  I don't get the shortcuts you are mentioning above like CU results etc. I am new to this place and I want my block lifted as it's without any violations DanBritton (talk) 18:41, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

CU check user [], it looks at your IP to determine if it has been used before. Slatersteven (talk) 18:49, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

What was the findings of that? My IP is used for first time here DanBritton (talk) 19:04, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

No idea, as I did not have anything to do with it. Slatersteven (talk) 19:06, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

I had different opinion from you so you made be blocked. If you had no idea, what are you doing here itseems. Just wow. DanBritton (talk) 19:11, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

I was telling you what CU meant, that was ll. Slatersteven (talk) 19:15, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

How did you got to know that I was blocked, that you ended up being here on my talkpage. It's clear you made me report. Plus those guys @Abecedare

@PhilKnight

Blocked me on basis of a probability and not some proof. I didn't knew wiki is controled and free spe ech is curved by some cabales. DanBritton (talk) 19:23, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

Someone removed a post of yours as a sock, so I looked at your talk page. It really is not hard to figure that out. And read WP:NOTDUMB. Slatersteven (talk) 19:26, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

@Slatersteven I am not US citizen, why are you citing me that. 96 percent of people who live in this world are not US citizens. You straightout made me blocked via your fellow editors and now they are not replying. DanBritton (talk) 19:31, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

I have no idea what you are talking about, and feel you need to read wp:cir and now bow out. Slatersteven (talk) 19:34, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

I asked some very senior Wiki editors and they told I can fight you out in this issue. As I am blocked citing a possibility, not proven charges.

@331dot

@Abecedare

@Slatersteven

@PhilKnight DanBritton (talk) 19:38, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

DanBritton, I don't now what "very senior Wiki editors" you have been talking to but I would suggest reading WP:Guide to appealing blocks instead. If you wish, you can ask another admin to review the block by posting the unblock template as before; or, as I said earlier, I am willing to unblock you albeit with a topic ban. Arguing with Slatersteven, who is not an admin and played no role in you being blocked, is not helpful. Abecedare (talk) 19:41, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

I asked for that you and some user called @331dot dot rejected it citing duplicate request paste in a section headar. I didn't knew how to put that so may be i did

@Abecedare DanBritton (talk) 19:56, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

Also I saw @Slatersteven in the sock puppet enquiry page were he was among those insisting on remove some user called Rightmostdoor or something along with my account and others aswell. He wanted all the people not agreeing to his point of view out and so he did. I don't know why you people are behaving like this, blocking editors on their first day citing possibility. What if it was done on your first day of joining wiki.

@331dot

@Abecedare

@Slatersteven

@PhilKnight DanBritton (talk) 20:02, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

Lets make this clear, the user is casting aspersions, I have not participated in any SPI investigation lately, into any user. Slatersteven (talk) 20:06, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

You were there with some users @Orientls

@PunjabiEditor69

@Simonm223 also present discussing on how some users like me, rightmostdoor, shrey samrat, and some truthprevailing account holders should be investigated. I have proof and I am not lying. Otherwise how did I get this detailed infoDanBritton (talk) 20:13, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

@331dot

@Abecedare

@Slatersteven look into what I said DanBritton (talk) 20:16, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

I did hence the link to wp:cir. ANI is not an SPI investigation they are different things. This is my last word to you, do not ping me again, if you will not listen, my patience is exhausted. Slatersteven (talk) 20:22, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

Dont lie blatantly, you said let's just PP the talk page and see who goes away, inorder to remove your ideological rivals in the name of bludgeoning. I looked at the history of the talk page and found out you did similar things for rightmostdoor, truthprevails also. You just want to push one sided narratives with @Simonm223

@Orientls

@Slatersteven. DanBritton (talk) 20:36, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

@Abecedare when am I getting unblocked on other topics, it seems you denied of what you said earlier DanBritton (talk) 20:38, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

@Simonm223 is defending abusers like user @Shahshagoose but banning his ideological opponents who are just coming up with facts, cause it doesn't allow him to do blatant propoganda DanBritton (talk) 20:47, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

Who are you and why are you tagging me four times here? Simonm223 (talk) 20:57, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

It seems you're accusing me of getting you blocked but I have no recollection of interacting with you. Were you using another account? Simonm223 (talk) 20:59, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

Read the full conversation above and see my allegations with proof

@Simonm223 DanBritton (talk) 21:00, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

Please stop tagging me. This is very silly and quite annoying. I have nothing to do with your situation. Simonm223 (talk) 21:02, 23 May 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).

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

---

Request reason:

I was blocked without any violations, I just got blocked in few hours after I created my first Wikipedia accountDanBritton (talk) 18:36, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Duplicate request placed in a section header. 331dot (talk) 18:57, 23 May 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.

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I was blocked without any violations, I just got blocked in few hours after I created my first Wikipedia account DanBritton (talk) 18:36, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

Decline reason:

As noted, a checkuser with access to private technical information has determined that you seem to be a sock account. If this is a big coincidence, please agree to a topic ban from the contentious topic area of India/Pakistan and tell what topics you will edit instead. 331dot (talk) 18:57, 23 May 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.

• The relevant discussion with a checkuser is here. Note though that the block is based on a combination of the CU's findings, behavioral evidence indicating sock puppetry, and jumping into the CTOP discussion beset with similar disruptive SPAs. Abecedare (talk) 19:03, 23 May 2025 (UTC)