From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I have blocked this account indefinitely as a disruptive sockpuppet. --Ars Scriptor 14:07, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
does not qualify for speedy deletion per:
- Author requests deletion. Any page for which deletion is requested by the original author, provided the page's only substantial content was added by its author and was mistakenly created. If the author blanks the page, this can be taken as a deletion request. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by BostonMA (talk • contribs).
-
- However, I'll happily lock the page. ➨ ЯEDVERS 21:05, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
This blocked user (block log | autoblocks | unblock | contribs) asked to be unblocked, but an administrator or other user has reviewed and declined this request. Other administrators or users can also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). This unblock request continues to be visible. Do not replace this message with another unblock request nor add another unblock request.
Request reason: "one edit is simply not disruptive, I have every right to have an alternate account, have put a notification on my primary user page, and was about to put one one this user page. Danuman Has 19:24, 5 December 2006 (UTC)"
Decline reason: "It is clear that this is a sockpuppet of Hanuman Das. Yes, you may have alternative accounts, but this one is used solely to make a point based on comments at Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Mattisse made by Hanuman Das at the diff listed below.—Řÿūłóñģ (竜龍) 19:39, 5 December 2006 (UTC)"
This template should be removed when the block has expired, or after 2 days in the case of blocks of 1 week or longer.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/Mattisse&diff=next&oldid=92202488
- RFCs aren't binding nor do they set policy. -- Drini 19:40, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
- Besides, I see that account being used in a WP:POINT way, not to do actual work. -- Drini 19:41, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
This blocked user (block log | autoblocks | unblock | contribs) asked to be unblocked, but an administrator or other user has reviewed and declined this request. Other administrators or users can also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). This unblock request continues to be visible. Do not replace this message with another unblock request nor add another unblock request.
Request reason: "It was used once, made intentionally identifiable, and does not deserve blocking nor harassment of my primary user with tagging. This alternate account has committed neither "abuse, libel, or ban evasion" as the tag inaccurately states. Please remove the tag from User:Hanuman Das and feel free to delete this account's talk and user page and lock the account if you wish. Thanks. Also, please unblock the IP. I have a legitimate, unblocked account, and have committed no serious policy violation. It's too bad Ars Scriptor can't take a joke, but that's the extent of the matter."
Decline reason: "You appear to have changed your mind. Goodbye. ➨ ЯEDVERS 21:05, 5 December 2006 (UTC)"
This template should be removed when the block has expired, or after 2 days in the case of blocks of 1 week or longer.
Danuman Has 19:47, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
