I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
ϢereSpielChequers 07:48, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to
KSEVWatch (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
This is an illegitimate block intended to stop me from protesting the harassment and stalking behavior I am receiving from the edit warrior Elyzium23 who is stalking and harassing editors about content on the Least I Could Do and The Dating Guy articles.
Decline reason:
You're blocked for disruptive editing at
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
The same editor who blocked me has also removed my protest of Elyzium's behavior: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AThe_Dating_Guy&action=historysubmit&diff=447705267&oldid=447704352
No I am not! The message that came up when I tried to edit is that it is for "making personal attacks" which is nonsense. I reported him after he started trying to harass me. Meanwhile he has not been blocked for making his personal attacks and for filing false reports.
Yes. You are. Please address the disruptive editing pattern at AIV. Address your own behavior, not that of others. Kuru (talk) 19:20, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I blocked you for disruptive editing and edit warring on
If you have the time and ever return, I have filed a report on Elizium over at WP:ANI and I would encourage you to drop by and supply diffs about his behavior. Wikipedia editors and admins are not supposed to engage in the sort of deliberate provocation and attack behavior that can be seen in how you were treated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.109.127.141 (talk) 16:19, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
original unblock reason
I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that
Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Nick-D (talk) 07:43, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am not a sockpuppet. I was not even logged in for the past day. I took the advice of people after the last and took some time off. what can I do to prove my innocence? I cannot even respond to the nonsense I am being accused of from how I am seeing things now.
{{helpme}}
I do not understand this. The pasted template crap above is meaningless to my situation. I have been falsely accused of being someone else and I am not that person nor a "sockpuppet." How do I clear my name? What proof do I have to provide? what am I supposed to do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by KSEVWatch (talk • contribs) 08:59, 3 September 2011
You have been suspended from Wikipedia indefinitely because an investigation showed that you have used other accounts for wrongdoing, I would suggest occupying your time with something else. SwisterTwister talk 06:09, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]