User talk:ChristopherJames2008

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: "How am I abusing multiple accounts? I have only been on this wikipedia site for four days now so I dont see how I can abuse multiple accounts because I am User:ChristopherJames2008 and no-one else. I dont see the point in having more than one account it pointless. I believe that this block is not fair as I am not aware of anything that I have done wrong or have messed about creating vandalism or random pages or anything like that. So why the block"

Decline reason: "Checkuser has proved you were abusing accounts on wiki. Unblocking this account would only set a dangerous precedent to others. Rudget (Help?) 16:52, 3 June 2008 (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.

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: "I have no sockpuppets what so ever. I have only been here for 4 days. If you would like to provide me with the checkuser details then I can show these to my dad who is a qualified lawyer and im sure that he will decide. Just so you admins dont get the wrong idea it is not a legal threat so dont say not unblocking for a legal threat because I know you do."

Decline reason: "I'm sorry, but the checkuser data is protected data, and may contain information which is not about you as well. It is for this reason we cannot release the checkuser data. — :-) Stwalkerster [ talk ] 17:39, 3 June 2008 (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.

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: "Per above talk with User:Rudget I am not a sockpuppet of anybody nor do I plan to be a sockpuppet master or sockpuppet. If this unblock request is successful then I will edit wikipedia properly and if this is a conditon of the unblock then it can be. If an admin feels that I am breaking any of the policies then you can block me again but at least give me a chance to prove myself like Jimbo Wales said " I believe in giving a user a second chance to reform" that is why I believe I should be given a second chance. I could be put on probation for a while if an admin feels this is necessary?"

Decline reason: "Chris, how many times have we been here before? I knew who you were the second you turned up on my talk page (and I think that you knew that I knew too as you went quiet for quite a while when I asked if we had met before) You have proved time and time again that you cannot be sensible with your editing and your pattern is so predictable that you are found out (and blocked) more and more quickly each time. The solution to this whole mess lies with you - if you come here and edit appropriately, don't make wild claims and don't abuse the system then no-one will bother you and you can help us with the serious business of writing an encyclopaedia - isn't that the reason we are all here? nancy ^(talk) 18:21, 3 June 2008 (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.

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: " Fine then Nancy I will admit that yes I have created sockpuppets to get around my block but not to cause vandalism but to contribute to wikipedia and the writing of the encylopedia. If you look at my socks they have all contributed reasonably well with the exception of a few which I let my friends use to mess around on. I will no longer create sockpuppets if this account is unblocked because I wont have a need to create them in order to contribute to the wiki will I? If I do get unblocked then I would like to be put on probation where I have to conform to a few things and avoid a few things. Is this acceptable in order to be unblocked?"

Decline reason: "Had you immediately admitted that you were using sockpuppet accounts, you might have had a chance. Your flat denial ("I have no sockpuppets what so ever") does not put any trust in you. And "my account has been operated by somebody else" is the oldest excuse; I (and all the rest of the admins) have heard it a dozen times. Request to unblock denied. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 19:14, 3 June 2008 (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.