Contents

User talk:G4lxy4Wiki

Hello, I'm Midori No Sora. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributionstoKrist Novoselic have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 04:57, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

aw fuck someone hacked my wikipedia page hell nah G4lxy4Wiki (talk) 05:00, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your account has been blocked indefinitely because it is suspected that it has been compromised. If your account is globally locked, contact cawikimedia.org for assistance. Otherwise, if you are able to confirm that you are the user who created this account, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section), then add this below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 05:00, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jauerback:inticket:2024010710003053 someone claiming to be G4lxy4Wiki says that they made the "...someone hacked my wikipedia page..." edit above; besides that can you provide any evidence that this account is compromised (e.g. was a checkuser involved?) — xaosflux ^Talk 02:13, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FYI to @331dot: below. If this is thought to actually be compromised, it should be sent up for a global lock, then CA@ could take it over. However, the block may otherwise be warranted for other types of disruption. — xaosflux ^Talk 02:15, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, you're right, the comment of aw fuck someone hacked my wikipedia page hell nah was what made me choose to block as compromised account vs a vandalism only block, but with this edit, I think it's just a matter of semantics on why the user is indefinitely blocked. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 17:06, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jauerback thanks, think it is safe to call this a VOA block and not bother unblocking and reblocking. G4lxy4Wiki, so what that means is that ca@wikimedia and the stewards team will have nothing to do with this; and that any future local unblock appeals should be substantive of your observed vandalism. — xaosflux ^Talk 18:18, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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).

G4lxy4Wiki (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Yes, I was wrong in doing this. This account is not compromised and I vandalized this Wikipedia article myself. I was messing around with friends on Discord and did not realize the impact my vandalism would have on this article. My edit is unacceptable and I understand the reason for the block. In the past, I have contributed to Wikipedia before and wish to continue in doing so. Again, this is all my doing, and is not anyone else’s fault. This account is not compromised, and I wish to continue in contributing to the Wikipedia community. I will make sure not to make any sort of vandalism-type edits that disrupt and negatively impact the content on Wikipedia.G4lxy4Wiki (talk) 16:49, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

In line with standard account security procedures on many websites, we don't unblock compromised accounts, as once it is claimed an account is compromised we no longer know who is in control of it. Please see WP:COMPROMISED for further guidance. 331dot (talk) 16:58, 7 January 2024 (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.