User talk:76.120.167.187

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

76.120.167.187 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I've been blocked for an unknown reason. Whoever blocked me did not give one, so I have no clue what I'm supposed to say here. If it's releated to these sockpuppet accusations, it's already been proven by an admin they they are false do to my IP.76.120.167.187 (talk) 07:05, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

MuZemike's verdict was quite clear: this IP is a sock. Favonian (talk) 09:04, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

76.120.167.187 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

But that's the person who I was talking about! He said that because of my IP, there was no way I could be a sock of that person. He said it was out of their range! Why would he say that and then say the opposite! I'm not a sock!76.120.167.187 (talk) 09:39, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Nope, that's not what he said -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:10, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Your block log indicates it's due to block evasion, and Checkuser sez otherwise. Nice try, Fragments. —Jeremy v^_^v ^{Components:V S M} 08:22, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what you're talking about. An admin already confirmed I wasn't a sock, because my IP was nowhere near that person's range. 76.120.167.187 (talk) 08:40, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

76.120.167.187 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Here is a link to the exact edit: [3] What is going on here?76.120.167.187 (talk) 10:48, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Decline reason:

...and two lines down, the same checkuser states that the IP "definitely is" a sock. There's more to technical/behavioural evidence than a simple IP address (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:08, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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.

You have been blocked from editing your talkpage due to abuse of the unblock process. You may still contest any current block by e-mailing unblock-en-l, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.

(I had this typed anyway, so it seems a shame to waste it) At User talk:MuZemike#Suspected sockpuppet of Fragments of Jade, MuZemike goes on to say "However, this IP is most certainly FoJ and has been appropriately blocked by another administrator. The WP:BOOMERANG striketh back." - he's referring to 76.120.167.187 -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:11, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.