Jump to content

Universal Code of Conduct/Coordinating Committee/Cases/2026/Indefinitely blocked in Turkish Wikipedia over allegedly being a sock

Add links
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
This case is closed. If you have comments or a request to have it reopened, post a comment on the talk page.
Parties
Parties Notifications
Rapsavunucusu3 (talk) 14:45, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] Filer (no diff required)
Vincent Vega (talk • contribs • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST) [1]

U4C member alert: @U4C: Ajraddatz, Barkeep49, BRPever, Civvì, Dbeef, Ghilt, Ibrahim.ID, Luke081515, Denis Barthel, Ferien, PBradley-WMF. Rapsavunucusu3 (talk) 14:45, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Rapsavunucusu3

Description of the problem - (Rapsavunucusu3)

Hello all. In my leisure time I enjoy reading the noticeboards and discussions regarding Wikipedia's inner workings in both my native tongue (Turkish) and in English Wikipedia. I also edit from time to time in articlespace or in Wikipedia pages. I noticed a few nitpicks in Turkish Wikipedia's latest admin noticeboard topic regarding Basak's block. At first I wanted to edit it anonymously, however my IP range was blocked by Dr. Coal for sockpuppetery and from my understanding I could correct this by logging in to an account. Then it came to my mind that I had this account. With this account I originally edited Turkish and English Wikipedia regarding Turkish rap. I found the login details in my computer and so I logged in.

When I logged in I first decided to add a COI notice to the article at the crux of the Basak's block. (It can be viewed here. It's still pending verification though.). Then I decided to do a good-faith edit to that thread. I sorted the admin responses chronologically. (it can be seen here) My good faith edit was reverted and Vincent Vega imposed a sockpuppetery block on me, saying it was a checkuser detection. I did not understand why I was blocked, as after that revert no request for a sockpuppet investigation or block was made. I logged in the first place because my IP range (a /24 range block according to the block note) was blocked. In my country ISP's tend to give out the same or similar IP to a lot of people and it doesn't help that we are all IPv4. This is also why I believe the rangeblock hit me. I logged in as requested and I feel punished for such a thing.

Previous attempts at a solution - (Rapsavunucusu3)

Due to my message page block I can't appeal my block, and no other resources to appeal were provided in my block notice.

Suggested solutions - (Rapsavunucusu3)

Getting unblocked and I want TPA revocation to not be the default for all blocks so that U4C isn't forced to be the ArbCom of Turkish Wikipedia. (I do think that needs to be established at a point as it will at least formalize the solutions for everyone and not make them appear custom-made to the problem at hand. The English ArbCom is something I look up to in this regard. From what I have seen; it has issues, but it does make sure to find solutions and makes sure local issues don't escalate.)

Vincent Vega

Previous attempts at a solution - Vincent Vega

Suggested solutions - Vincent Vega

Other feedback

For people who are not parties, the following rules apply:

  • Comments/replies may not be longer the 500 words and may not include more than 25 diffs/links. The U4C may, if asked, grant additional words or diffs/links.
  • Comments/replies are permitted only in your own section
  • Contributions that do not help clarify the matter can be removed
  • All accusations and claims must be supported with diffs/links

Other feedback (EDITOR NAME)

Discussion between the involved parties and the U4C members

Only the involved parties and U4C members may edit in this section.

thank you for your fast response. My indefinite block also included a talk page access block so I can't appeal. Rapsavunucusu3 (talk) 15:22, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Vincent Vega can you give Rapsavunucusu3 instructions on how to appeal? Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 15:28, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dear Barkeep49 only check my checkuser log. Best. Vincent Vega msg? 16:50, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    While I can check your log, if we don't have jurisdiction I won't check the log in order to protect privacy. I believe this is a Turkish Wikipedia decision and other than ensuring that it can be appealed (which has been fixed below) there's nothing for the U4C to do here. Barkeep49 (talk) 17:43, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Barkeep49: The user can appeal via VRT and also already appealed here. If you will not check the logs and previous block, I would call another local CU @Elmacenderesi: here for check myself and his/her IP.
    I closed the messaging page and left the email function enabled because I didn't want to waste my community's time. The user said they didn't add any email account, which is impossible for me to know, and besides, it's his/her own choice. In short, like every block, this one isn't unappealed; it has already been appealed.
    I kindly request that dismiss the case. Do not let dear UCoC Team to be a part of this harrasment attempt. Best. Vincent Vega msg? 18:37, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    This wasn't an harrasment attempt, if it has came across as such I am deeply sorry. I am a bit occupied at the moment, though I will appeal by e-mail per your request. Because appeals generally become open to public it did not cross my mind to appeal from e-mail. Rapsavunucusu3 (talk) 20:59, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    This user’s e-mail sending function is still valid. He/she can mail me. However he/she did not. Vincent Vega msg? 16:52, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    i didn't have an email attached and I thought my appeal would be public, however I have added an email to my account at your reminder. Rapsavunucusu3 (talk) 17:06, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Barkeep49: I am ready to carry out the requested CheckUser review on the Turkish Wikipedia. I fully endorse the procedure carried out by Vincent Vega. --e.c. 20:57, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

U4C decision

Only U4C members may edit in this section.

U4C member discussion

  • In a previous U4C case the U4C noted that sockpuppetry is not a UCoC violation. We decided that even though in that case several of us (including experienced checkusers) felt that the block was wrong. I have not looked into the merits of this case, but absent something beyond issues involving socking I do not think we have jurisidiction. I would therefore encourage a local appeal which seemingly has not been done in this case and is always a good step before the U4C. Barkeep49 (talk) 15:16, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Accept votes

Decline votes

  1. Per my statements above - out of scope for the U4C. Barkeep49 (talk) 19:24, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Per comments above, it looks like this should be appealed locally via email. dbeef (talk) 02:12, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Please appeal this locally, --Ghilt (talk) 14:14, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Should be addressed locally --Civvì (talk) 14:13, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Agree with my colleagues above. I think Barkeep49 has set this case in right direction.--BRP ever 14:26, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Motions

U4C members may propose motions to resolve the case or as a temporary measure during the case.

Updates

This section is used only by U4C members and official designees (including WMF staff who support the U4C) to provide updates about the request.

Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Universal_Code_of_Conduct/Coordinating_Committee/Cases/2026/Indefinitely_blocked_in_Turkish_Wikipedia_over_allegedly_being_a_sock&oldid=30145331"