User talk:PJK 1993
Page contents not supported in other languages.
PJK 1993(block log •active blocks •global blocks •contribs •deleted contribs •filter log •creation log •change block settings •unblock •checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Extended content |
|---|
| The 6 month block was implemented byDaniel Case without going through the standard procedure on the AN, instead JeanClaudeN1 simply prompted Daniel Case[1] on their personal talk page and Daniel Case blocked me without going through AN, which would allow me to defend my self and point to the fact that there was no edit war on the article in question, and that JeanClaudeN1 was acting in bad faith, deliberately trying to block me as an editing strategy. I feel this was the case for some time now, since JeanClaudeN1 has raised numerous AN claims that I'm some other blocked editor or IP, and Daniel Case several times now blocked various IPs writing in "maybe a sockpuppet of PJK 1993" (you either know for sure or not, otherwise it's a personal attack). From the start Daniel Case has show, what I perceived as bias, blocking only me for a previous edit war where both JeanClaudeN1 and I reverted text, and referring to some IPs as "Polish IPs" (I see you opened an SPI that got the Polish IP blocked, meaning PJK should also be blocked. So, I will be blocking PJK sitewide for a month for this. Daniel Case (talk) 02:20, 12 October 2025 (UTC)) This is clearly a sign of bias, since Wikipedia upholds neutrality (not calling out editors or IPs by ethnicity or nationality). Also, Daniel Case disparagingly claimed that I don't understand English[2]. My original 30 day block that was placed by Daniel Case also resulted from a prompt by JeanClaudeN1. That particular accusation claimed that I was using a sockpuppet, in fact that IP, which was based in a different geographical location clearly said in a later discussion that we are not the same person and this was a false accusation. Finally, when applying the 6 month block, the process was incorrectly managed by Daniel Case and I was initially not allowed the full appeals process, something which was questioned byFirefangledfeathers (disscussion here), however later Daniel Case did not bother to leave a message on my talk page informing me of the change in the appeals process. In the end, I feel that Daniel Case has been and is using poor judgment and possibly is showing signs of some kind of unconscious bias. I ask that my block is removed, due to poor handling by Daniel Case and a lack of overall transparency when initiating the 6 month block. --PJK 1993 (talk)08:19, 24 November 2025 (UTC)|}[reply]I'll also add that the page in questionRoyal Prussia did not have a contentious topic tag, which was only added later by Daniel Case. --PJK 1993 (talk)12:06, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply] Decline reason: Procedural decline only. See the original block notice for guidance on an appropriate appeal or readWP:AEBLOCK.Firefangledfeathers (talk /contribs)16:32, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply] If you want to make any further unblock requests, pleaseread theguide 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. |