User talk:Adam233

Hello Adam233, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement.

Gene93k

Happy editing! • Gene93k (talk) 12:15, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
Introduction The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page
Finding your way around
Table of contents Department directory
Editing articles
How to develop an article Manual of Style

Getting help
Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Where to ask a question Help pages New contributors' help page
How you can help
Contributing to Wikipedia Community Portal Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility

Another ANI thread

FYI: [1]. --barneca (talk) 12:37, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry case

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Adam233 for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. Onecanadasquarebishopsgate 15:28, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for abusing multiple accounts, and disruption-only accounts. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

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).

Adam233 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

The sockpuppetry accusations are false. I am not Akc2114. That guy simply copied my formulations and my style to discredit me. Please start an RfCU. Adam233 (talk) 12:32, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

The checkusers, who are already very busy studying the data for more complicated and difficult cases, do not usually take the extra time to investigate extremely obvious cases of sockpuppetry, such as this one. — FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 13:23, 10 October 2008 (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.