La Grande Reverteur ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I don't think it's necessary for me to be blocked because the definition of sock puppetry is using multiple accounts abusively and disruptively, and I'm not doing anything to disrupt Wikipedia. I'm reverting vandalism.
Decline reason:
Checkuser verified sockpuppet of banned user. Please go away. -- jpgordon ::==( o ) 01:12, 13 August 2009 (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.
- Although I stand by my earlier defense of you, based on what was known to me at the time, the fact that you've gone ahead and vandalized some more (mixing vandalism with good edits in the manner you've practiced all along) makes me reconsider my opinion. You are capable of becoming a good editor, but you just don't seem to want to change. I'm really disappointed to realize this. I'm sorry but I can't defend you any longer. --
Soap
Talk/
Contributions 19:01, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what do you mean? I'm not doing anything harmful here. All I'm doing is reverting vandalism.
La Grande Reverteur ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Actually I have not been banned, I have just been blocked, and the blocking policy states that I can still edit in a different username, as long as I'm not causing disruption, since the purpose of a block is to prevent disruption. And I will not be disruptive, and I'll revert vandalism.
Decline reason:
LOL! Daniel Case ( talk) 15:28, 14 August 2009 (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.
You are, in fact,
block evading. I think it's clear that no admin will unblock you, so you are de facto banned. Instead of continuing this evasion, either leave Wikipedia or
appeal to the arbitration committee via their address, arbcom-l
lists.wikimedia.org. Thank you.
PeterSymonds (
talk) 13:50, 14 August 2009 (UTC)}
La Grande Reverteur ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I don't think it's necessary for me to be blocked because the definition of sock puppetry is using multiple accounts abusively and disruptively, and I'm not doing anything to disrupt Wikipedia. I'm reverting vandalism.
Decline reason:
Checkuser verified sockpuppet of banned user. Please go away. -- jpgordon ::==( o ) 01:12, 13 August 2009 (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.
- Although I stand by my earlier defense of you, based on what was known to me at the time, the fact that you've gone ahead and vandalized some more (mixing vandalism with good edits in the manner you've practiced all along) makes me reconsider my opinion. You are capable of becoming a good editor, but you just don't seem to want to change. I'm really disappointed to realize this. I'm sorry but I can't defend you any longer. --
Soap
Talk/
Contributions 19:01, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what do you mean? I'm not doing anything harmful here. All I'm doing is reverting vandalism.
La Grande Reverteur ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Actually I have not been banned, I have just been blocked, and the blocking policy states that I can still edit in a different username, as long as I'm not causing disruption, since the purpose of a block is to prevent disruption. And I will not be disruptive, and I'll revert vandalism.
Decline reason:
LOL! Daniel Case ( talk) 15:28, 14 August 2009 (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.
You are, in fact,
block evading. I think it's clear that no admin will unblock you, so you are de facto banned. Instead of continuing this evasion, either leave Wikipedia or
appeal to the arbitration committee via their address, arbcom-llists.wikimedia.org. Thank you.
PeterSymonds (
talk) 13:50, 14 August 2009 (UTC)}