User talk:NotBound

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Blocked as a sockpuppet

You have been blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet of a banned or blocked user. As a blocked or banned user you are not entitled to edit Wikipedia. All your edits have been reverted.

Details of how to appeal a block can be found at: Wikipedia:Appealing a block. Aksi_great (talk) 18:02, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Myself and User:Fear the Fire are blocked as sockpuppets of User:Sundaram7

These are the timings of my edits on 14th march:

  • # 12:56, # 12:51, # 12:48, # 12:39, # 12:37, # 12:36, # 12:36, # 12:35, # 12:34, # 12:31, # 12:27, # 12:17,
  • # 11:23, # 10:56, # 10:55, # 10:49, # 10:48, # 10:19, # 10:18, # 10:13, # 10:11, # 10:09, # 10:02, # 09:34,
  • # 07:59, # 07:55, # 07:50, # 07:46, # 07:42, # 07:37, # 07:35, # 07:25, # 07:16,
  • # 06:50, # 06:49, # 06:39, # 06:26, # 06:24.

And these are the timings of User:Fear the Fire's edits on 14th march:

  • # 12:53, # 12:52, # 12:47,
  • # 07:42, # 07:40, # 07:33, # 07:33

see how it overlaps...

Please explain the reason if u(whoever examin's the block) r not satisfied with this argument.

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: "arguments are mentioned above"

Decline reason: "The argument for blocking, which is based on your IP data (see Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Pens withdrawn), is much more compelling. Daniel Bryant 07:11, 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: "User:Fear the Fire and My IP are the same. But it is different from the user User:Sundaram7(we are misjudged as sock puppets of User:Sundaram7 based on the fact that User:Sundaram7 was previously caught for sockpuppetry and User:Fear the Fire had similar kind of edits in the article National Development Front. Please see the talk page of User:Fear the Fire for his arguments"

Decline reason: "At the very least, you are an admitted abusive sockpuppeteer with NotPuppet (talk · contribs). Given this, I find it likely that the checkuser request correctly identified you as part of an abusive group of sockpuppets. — Yamla 15:55, 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.

Reviewing admin, see also User talk:NotPuppet. Sandstein 13:13, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

What kind of arguments are these??? "you are an admitted abusive sockpuppeteer with NotPuppet". Abussuve??? When I was wrongly claimed as a sockpuppet of some user, I have started a new user account and with the intention of not interfering in any of the article edited by the sunderam!! i myself put a word in my user page regarding this.. and now u are giving this as a reason for my block??? what about the previous block?? seems that checkuser dint have time to check and when he was prompted by some other user(as seen from his talk page) he just agreed and blocked everyone..


hmmm... so u guys don't want me to have even single account in wikipedia.. after all why should i try to contribute to this kind of system?? thank god, I could save lot of my valuable time...