User talk:Killa Kitty

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: "There is no substantiation of the allegation that I am a sockpuppet of User:Cindery. I am not. Furthermore, there has been no discussion on this ban nor has there been a Checkuser request. My contributions do not match the areas of interest that Cindery edited. This block is based soley on my revisions to the Wikipedia:List of banned users in removing unsubstantiated allegations and legal implications of libel from Cindery's entry. Action by User:Durova is completely punitive and in violation of the blocking policy. Cited reason for block is WP:DUCK which is neither a guideline or policy but an essay. Complete misuse of administrative powers."

Decline reason: "Please state for the record whether or not you are the same person or in any way related to the person who uses the account, Cindery. You have only stated here that there's no substantiation of the allegation but have not specifically denied the allegation. — Yamla 18:28, 30 March 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.

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: "There is no substantiation of the allegation that I am a sockpuppet of User:Cindery. I am not. Furthermore, there has been no discussion on this ban nor has there been a Checkuser request. My contributions do not match the areas of interest that Cindery edited. This block is based soley on my revisions to the Wikipedia:List of banned users in removing unsubstantiated allegations and legal implications of libel from Cindery's entry. Action by User:Durova is completely punitive and in violation of the blocking policy. Cited reason for block is WP:DUCK which is neither a guideline or policy but an essay. Complete misuse of administrative powers. I AM NOT CINDERY!!!1111"

Decline reason: "WP:DUCK is a commonly user rationale when a checkuser request would be denied anyway because the sockpuppetry is too obvious to warrant its use. Beyond that, I find it odd that a user who registered on the 24th knows about checkuser, various policies, ANI, etc. Even without the sockpuppetry thing, your edit history is filled with trolling [1] [2] [3]. Denied. — IrishGuy ^talk 18:54, 30 March 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.

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: "Discussion for community ban has not taken place. Reasons for continuing ban are circumstantial. I am not Cindery. This block and its continuation is out of process."

Decline reason: "Per above. Please be aware that futher abuse of {{unblock}} can lead to your talk page being protected. — John Reaves (talk) 21:52, 30 March 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.