User talk:Istoalinije

Sockpuppet investigation

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ideabeach, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

Katieh5584 (talk) 11:47, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Aha that's interesting. We are group of Bosnians who think you must not delete Omerbashich claim. It's well known here and 5 year old. Use talk page to discuss issues. And yes it is true that pope & 6 catholic viceroys rule Bosnia. They are called " high representatives " (www.ohr.int) but they have powers above court, parliament and presidency. So they are absolutist rulers and because always catholic it means Dr. Omerbashich is 100% corect. It doesn't matter how you call something, it's about powers they have and they have colonial governoer powers. Let us know how investigating goes and then please put his claim back. Hope this takes very fast Istoalinije (talk) 12:01, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

May 2014

Do not create, add, maintain, insert, or restore hoaxes on Wikipedia, such as you did with the article List of current pretenders. Usually, hoaxes will be caught and marked for deletion shortly after they are created. If you are interested in how accurate Wikipedia is, a more constructive test method would be to try to find inaccurate statements that are already in Wikipedia – and then to correct them if possible. Please do not disrupt Wikipedia. Feel free to take a look at the five pillars of Wikipedia to learn more about this project and how you can contribute constructively. Thank you. Katieh5584 (talk) 11:48, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Aha that's interesting. We are group of Bosnians who think you must not delete Omerbashich claim. So is unclear why we are now block automatically also befor any investigating? Our king's claim is well known here and 5 year old. Use talk page to discuss issues. And yes it is true that pope & 6 catholic viceroys rule Bosnia. They are called " high representatives " (www.ohr.int) but they have powers above court, parliament and presidency. So they are absolutist rulers and because always catholic it means Dr. Omerbashich is 100% corect. It doesn't matter how you call something, it's about powers they have and they have colonial governoer powers. Let us know how investigating goes and then please put his claim back. Hope this takes very fast. Please unblock first as we are independent and can certainly show our passports to anyone who needs for verifyin. Istoalinije (talk) 11:57, 7 May 2014 (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).

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

Request reason:

Aha that's interesting. We are group of Bosnians who think you must not delete Omerbashich claim. It's well known here and 5 year old. Use talk page to discuss issues. And yes it is true that pope & 6 catholic viceroys rule Bosnia. They are called " high representatives " (www.ohr.int) but they have powers above court, parliament and presidency. So they are absolutist rulers and because always catholic it means Dr. Omerbashich is 100% corect. It doesn't matter how you call something, it's about powers they have and they have colonial governoer powers. Let us know how investigating goes and then please put his claim back. Hope this takes very fast. We can show our passports for identifyin so please no false accusation! Hope you can show your passport too. thank

Decline reason:

That basically reads as a straight-up admission of sockpuppetry to me. Yunshui ^雲 _水 13:30, 7 May 2014 (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).

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

Request reason:

It would be sockpuppetry if we were solicited to help out, however we are royalists by our own choosing. In case you didn't know, royalists support royal rights of a crown prince or king, not the other way around. That means (in case you don't understand English) that burden of proof is on you, and that your "that basically reads as" is just your opinion but you provide no facts. Please unblock promptly. Dr. Omerbashich has every right to have his 5 years old claim listed with all others on the appropriate pages. They were all reported by local media as well, and that's the only requirement for inclusion. Mentioning his claim won't put crown on his head (unfortunately) and you have no right to discriminate because you misunderstand or dislike royalism. Istoalinije (talk) 16:28, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Your particular reasons for desiring to perpetuate this particular hoax are of no interest to us; it's run its course on Wikipedia. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 18:12, 12 May 2014 (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.