User talk:600josh
Read Wikipedia:Blocking policy#Block reviews
- To administartors - is there any evidence for my earlier assertion? I couldn't find any, but then I am rather inexperienced in dealing with this problem. Please help as I would hate to have an innocent user banned.Petebutt (talk) 03:07, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
- This banned user has attempted to evade the block on talk page editing by editing without logging in. Consequently, this page has been protected against editing by unlogged-in editors and by new accounts. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:46, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
- It is possible that he is innocent, but he is falling further into the jaws of a permanent block. Would it be possible to unfreeze his talk page so he can at least lodge an appeal correctly? I have given him the tools, and if he refuses to use them sensibly then be it on his own head.Petebutt (talk) 15:27, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
- I have directed his latest block evading IP to contact WP:BASC to appeal. That is the appeal of last resort for long term blocked or banned users whose talk page has been revoked. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:00, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
- It is possible that he is innocent, but he is falling further into the jaws of a permanent block. Would it be possible to unfreeze his talk page so he can at least lodge an appeal correctly? I have given him the tools, and if he refuses to use them sensibly then be it on his own head.Petebutt (talk) 15:27, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
- Petebutt, it is entirely commendable that you are so willing to assume good faith, but I have spent a very long time studying the relevant editing histories of the relevant accounts, and I am convinced that you are mistaken in thinking that "it is possible that he is innocent". There are just so many different ways in which the editing corresponds that it really is beyond any plausible chance coincidence. JamesBWatson (talk) 20:08, 18 September 2012 (UTC)