User talk:Kathybealefan

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Jezebel'sPonyo ^{bons mots} 20:12, 2 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).

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

Request reason:

I have been accused of sockpuppetry but there seems to be no evidence to substantiate this. All I have done is edit pages relating to EastEnders, and I have corrected things which I believe to be false. I really have no knowledge of why I have been blocked. Can this please be undone or can someone explain what I've done?Kathybealefan (talk) 23:37, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Created after hte last sock was blocked, continuing the same edits as the protection on the pages expires. Seems clear. Kuru (talk) 23:44, 4 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).

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

Request reason:

There is no evidence. What has actually happened? I looked at some of the edits of the person in question but I made edits on other things. What real evidence is there? None, just spurious allegations. Can someone please unblock me?Kathybealefan (talk) 00:19, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

There is clear behavioral evidence that this is a case of block evasion: same intensely focused area of interest (yes, some edits outside it - but so did they, and this is a favorite tactic for the exact reason of being able to say this), same username format, created shortly after the putative sockmaster's account was indef'd. I'm sorry, but the evidence adds up far too clearly for this to be unblocked without a very convincing explanation. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 02:50, 5 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).

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

Request reason:

The reality is that I have edited outside what the accused has done. I have made new contributions but the fact that I agree with someone on one aspect, which by the way has been confirmed by EastEnders, does not mean I am a sockpuppet. As for username format, I am a fan of Kathy Beale. I had to use Wikipedia to find out who Angie Watts. So again, can I please have a proper explanation rather than being blocked using spurious allegations or I will take this further. I fear that people are blocking me because they don't like my edits and have decided to make accusations of sockpuppetry.

Decline reason:

Checkuser verified abuser of multiple accounts. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 14:06, 5 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).

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

Request reason:

I am not an abuser of multiple accounts. Unblock me please.

Decline reason:

The evidence suggests otherwise. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 19:34, 5 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.