User talk:86.150.128.67

This blocked user (block log | autoblocks | rangeblocks | unblock | contribs | deleted contribs) has asked to be unblocked, but an administrator has reviewed and declined this request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock request while you are blocked.

Request reason: "WP:SPA is not a policy, nor does it state anything that condemns my editing. Indeed, it states that there is nothing inherently wrong with SPAs. On the other hand, WP:SOCK#LEGIT has me covered, as I do have another inactive account on Wikipedia - operated from college, albeit completely unrelated to this one, which I intend to limit to subjects such as Pedophilia and Child Sexual Abuse, in order to avoid personal identification (as in my other account) and visibility of contoversial subjects when editing from college. I have been quite forward about this, and you have been quite unfair in blocking me not once but twice without any justifiable reason. I have a short edit history, and challenge anyone to point to any WP:NPOV infractions, and argue them out with me. If they win the argument (I doubt that they could), then we can argue over whether a 1 year block with absolutely no warning is justified."

Decline reason: "Your edit history shows that your are a sole purpose account intent on tendentious editing to pro-pedophilia articles. You also seem to be engaged in defending other editors legitimately blocked for such editing. Given the number of editors banned from Wikipedia for such conduct, it seems likely that this is a sockpuppet account. This block can be contested through the usual channels. — WjBscribe 20:07, 28 October 2007 (UTC)"

Please make any further unblock requests by using the {{unblock}} template. However, abuse of the template may result in your talk page being protected.