From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
unblock|I did ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to deserve my 48-hour block's change to indefinite
- Reviewed. No this account was used for nothing but vandalism and the blocking admin extended the block since the same vandalism continued after this was blocked using a sockpuppet. --pgk(talk) 16:32, 20 June 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: "User:Francs2000 did not have CheckUser access at the time, so what proof is there that I used a sockpuppet after being blocked 48 hours?"
Decline reason: "Obvious cases of sockpuppetry do not require checkuser access"
This template should be removed when the block has expired, or after 2 days in the case of blocks of 1 week or longer.
Then what obvious proof is there that I used a sockpuppet? Apparently the "What links here" link from my user page brings up User:V9, but that user did not engage in the same vandalism I did. --Z6 19:26, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
