User talk:Derek Spears

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. 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.

Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:27, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request (April 13, 2025)

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).

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

Request reason:

I now I fully understand and acknowledge that I violated Wikipedia's sockpuppetry policy, I will never do it again. I regret my sockpuppetry. Administrators, I will not engage in sockpuppetry ever again. I now understand Wikipedia's policies and the importance of maintaining a fair and collaborative environment. I have seen the policy pages and read them. I understand Wikipedia's policy. I now understand that I will be punished for sockpuppetry. I understand that my use of sockpuppet accounts was a serious violation of Wikipedia's policies. I sincerely apologize for my actions and the disruption they caused to the community. I now understand that sockpuppetry undermines the collaborative editing process and erodes trust. I regret my behavior and promise that I will not engage in such activities again. I am committed to contributing positively to Wikipedia by editing pages. I understand what I did wrong and I'm guilty for it. I'm sorry to the administrators. I understand that rebuilding trust takes time, and I am willing to demonstrate my commitment to following Wikipedia's policies. I regret the impact my actions had on the Wikipedia community and the trust that was broken. I sincerely apologize for my actions and the disruption they caused. At the time, I wanted to support a particular viewpoint, I was frustrated with the discussions that I was getting. However, I now understand that this was not an acceptable way to proceed. I have reflected on my actions and understand that there were more appropriate ways to address the situation, such as mention alternative actions, engaging in constructive discussion, seeking dispute resolution. I hope that you will consider my appeal and give me the opportunity to demonstrate my commitment to contributing positively to Wikipedia. I understand that my actions were wrong, and I am prepared to work hard to regain the trust of the community. Thanks for reading this.

Decline reason:

We do not consider chatbot-generated requests. GPTZero score: 100%. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 14:11, 14 April 2025 (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.

Derek Spears (talk) 01:34, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Technical data shows no further instances of sockpuppetry since the initial block. I'll leave the review to another admin, though. --Yamla (talk) 12:00, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks. Derek Spears (talk) 13:53, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request (again)

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).

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

Request reason:

I now I fully understand and acknowledge that I violated Wikipedia's sockpuppetry policy, I will never do it again. I regret my sockpuppetry. Administrators, I will not engage in sockpuppetry ever again. I now understand Wikipedia's policies and the importance of maintaining a fair and collaborative environment. I have seen the policy pages and read them. I understand Wikipedia's policy. I now understand that I will be punished for sockpuppetry. I understand that my use of sockpuppet accounts was a serious violation of Wikipedia's policies. I sincerely apologize for my actions and the disruption they caused to the community. I now understand that sockpuppetry undermines the collaborative editing process and erodes trust. I regret my behavior and promise that I will not engage in such activities again. I am committed to contributing positively to Wikipedia by editing pages. I understand what I did wrong and I'm guilty for it. I'm sorry to the administrators. I understand that rebuilding trust takes time, and I am willing to demonstrate my commitment to following Wikipedia's policies. I regret the impact my actions had on the Wikipedia community and the trust that was broken. I sincerely apologize for my actions and the disruption they caused. At the time, I wanted to support a particular viewpoint, I was frustrated with the discussions that I was getting. However, I now understand that this was not an acceptable way to proceed. I have reflected on my actions and understand that there were more appropriate ways to address the situation, such as mention alternative actions, engaging in constructive discussion, seeking dispute resolution. I hope that you will consider my appeal and give me the opportunity to demonstrate my commitment to contributing positively to Wikipedia. I understand that my actions were wrong, and I am prepared to work hard to regain the trust of the community. Thanks for reading this.

Decline reason:

I don't know what point you're trying to make by submitting an identical appeal to the one that was just removed?

I was already going to decline this on the basis that it comes across as completely impersonal, shallow, and non-genuine... which may be another way of spelling out jpgordon's decline.

Also, having looked at your tomfoolery across the different accounts you had, I think you need to come up with something more persuasive, not to mention more specific, than "I'm sorry, I won't do it again".

I'm declining your appeal. I suggest you don't make the same one again, and instead read and understand WP:GAB before composing your next appeal (if any). DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:25, 14 April 2025 (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.

Derek Spears (talk) 14:16, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay my mistake. Derek Spears (talk) 13:53, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request

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).

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

Request reason:

I understand that my use of sockpuppet accounts was a serious violation of Wikipedia's policies. I sincerely apologize for my actions and the disruption they caused to the community. I now understand that sockpuppetry undermines the collaborative editing process and erodes trust. I regret my behavior and promise that I will not engage in such activities again. I am committed to contributing positively to Wikipedia by making good articles. I hope that you will consider my appeal and give me the opportunity to demonstrate my commitment to contributing positively to Wikipedia. I understand that my actions were wrong, and I am prepared to work hard to regain the trust of the community. I hope that you will consider my appeal and give me the opportunity to demonstrate my commitment to contributing positively to Wikipedia. I understand that my actions were wrong, and I am prepared to work hard to regain the trust of the community. Thanks for reading this.

Decline reason:

The best way to demonstrate your commitment to contributing positively to Wikipedia is to take the standard offer. Good luck. -- asilvering (talk) 01:46, 28 April 2025 (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.

Derek Spears (talk) 17:49, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure who wrote the above, but it doesn't match the grammar or tone of any of your previous contributions from your various accounts. I'll note for any reviewing admin that I would not support any appeal outside of a successful standard offer.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:43, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by that? Derek Spears (talk) 23:53, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Why are my appeals always getting declined? I worked hard on those appeals. Derek Spears (talk) 01:28, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple administrators encouraged you to take the WP:OFFER after finding your unblock request to be impersonal, shallow, and full of AI/LLM content. WP:OFFER means no editing on English Wikipedia at all for a minimum of six months with zero sockpuppeting. Ideally, you'd also participate at a project that you're not blocked from. Showing self-control by staying away from Wikipedia without evading a block and demonstrating good conduct elsewhere are typically things that can help rebuilding trust. If you instead continue to re-post similar unblock requests, then the most likely result is your talk page access will be revoked, and becoming unblocked in the future becomes far more difficult. Best wishes to you in whatever you decided to do. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 02:28, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Jessica Gavin

Hello, Derek Spears. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Jessica Gavin, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 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) 07:09, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Question for Ponyo

Ponyo, why did you block me for infinity? Derek Spears (talk) 21:22, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are not blocked "for infinity." You're blocked until an administrator is confident that the conduct you displayed will not repeat itself. As noted less than two months ago, multiple administrators expressed that they would not support an unblock request without you following WP:OFFER, meaning a minimum of six months of no posting to Wikipedia, no block evasion, with contributions on another Wikimedia project making an unblock more likely. It is very clear from the discussions on this page why you have been blocked. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 21:56, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bro, how would I edit on Wikipedia, then if I am blocked? Derek Spears (talk) 22:09, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are only blocked from this Wikipedia. You may edit on other Wikimedia Foundation projects where you are not blocked(one in another language you may know, or Simple English Wikipedia, Wikitionary, etc.) 331dot (talk) 09:05, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request (denying the sockpuppetry allegations)

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).

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

Request reason:

Hi, I wanted to say to all administrators that those accounts that my roommates made on Wikipedia I never made. I saw my roommate Spencer's unblock request, and I wanted to say that the sockpuppetry allegations are false. There is no evidence that I was engaging in sockpuppetry, and I would never do sockpuppetry on this website. These allegations are silly. We just live in the same house, and we have the same IP address since we live at the same residence. Thanks for reading this, and think about considering this request. Derek Spears (talk) 21:12, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Confirmed sockpuppetry. WP:SO is your only possibility now, and you'll want to drop your false claims denying sockpuppetry. We don't want to hear from you before 2026-01-17. Yamla (talk) 21:35, 17 July 2025 (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.

There is oversighted material at Spencer2343 that makes your roommate excuse exceedingly unlikely. And this request by you and this one are both by the same confirmed sock group. Your best hope here is the standard offer. I don't checkuser block accounts as confirmed socks just because they're random editors using the same IP, I block them as such when the technical evidence makes it clear that there is a connection between the accounts in violation of WP:SOCK.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:30, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]