User talk:BerelZ

Sockpuppetry

You might want to read WP:SOCK. I've also left you a message on your main account page explaining your alternatives. Dougweller (talk) 10:20, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

February 2010

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for blocked as a sockpuppet. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Dougweller (talk) 12:33, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your Reargun account is left unblocked as I am assuming good faith. Please don't use any other account or IP address to edit. Dougweller (talk) 12:41, 8 February 2010 (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).

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

Request reason:

Dougweller is obviously doing this for personal reasons probably because of his ideological views. I would like my account back and him to be banned from certain topics that he clearly has strong views on the subject of Khirbet Qeiyafa.

Decline reason:

Please read WP:NOTTHEM. –MuZemike 02:41, 9 February 2010 (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.

Just to note that I gave you a chance to tag this account as an acknowledged alternate account and you didn't take that up. In any case, you still have an unblocked account. Dougweller (talk) 05:51, 9 February 2010 (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).

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

Request reason:

Reargun upset you, so you stalked him. Then he left the wikipedia. Now you blame me and probably others on this issue. I think Dougweller that your edits should be checked in relation to this case. Clearly you have an ideological commitment that is not suitable for a person doing your role on the wikipedia.

Please include a decline or accept reason.

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.

BerelZ (talk) 01:14, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Obvious note to any Admins reviewing this, Reargun never left, this is a confirmed Sock probably now editing with IP addresses and with clear pov. Ironically after the CU I posted on Reargun's talk page that I was offering him good faith and not blocking him, and later found that because I didn't note this on the SPI case a CU clerk blocked Reargun for 2 weeks (and unblocked him after seeing my note, but the clerk was justifiably annoyed that I hadn't. Dougweller (talk) 06:31, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How is it confirmed? BerelZ (talk) 00:29, 12 February 2010 (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).

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

Request reason:

No reason has been supplied that I had anything to do with this other bloke, actually that other guy left the wikipedia long before I started, surely if you believe that this account is a sock then his account should be closed not mine

Decline reason:

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Reargun/Archive is pretty definative. I see no reason to believe that the two accounts are not being run by the same person. Jayron32 06:01, 15 February 2010 (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.