User talk:ClearsightWisdom

An editor has expressed a concern that this account may be a sockpuppet of DavidYork71 (talk · contribs · logs).
Please refer to the sockpuppet investigation of the sockpuppeteer, and editing habits or contributions of the sockpuppet for evidence. This policy subsection may be helpful.

Account information: block log – contribs – logs – abuse log – CentralAuth

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).

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

Request reason:

Block abuse by User:Gnangarra achieved reintroduction of spelling mistakes and reducing the comprehensiveness of article citations

Decline reason:

The fact that you created 3 alternate accounts to redo your edit is evidence that you have some ulterior motive. The article you were editing is aparently one of DavidYork71's previous targets. If you are DavidYork71, then any edit you make should be reverted on sight. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 15:09, 16 March 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.

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).

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

Request reason:

With your speculation and talk of "ulterior motives" you are beyond belief. That there is an article that is or was of interest to somebody has no importance to the mission of Wikipedia. The issue is you approving convenient excuses so the abusive element can reintroduce spelling mistakes and downgradings of the quality of article and reference content.

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.