User talk:MCIWS

Appealing the Block.....!!

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).

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

Request reason:

I was previously blocked for 36hours just because I reverted those socks WP:POV thrice. But this time Administrators blocked me for indefinite without even proper investigation? You blamed me for having socks while I challenged to prove this. My IP is visible, and the names administrators put it there with me of having socks are:- KnightWarrior25,Tejas MRCA,Transformer Auto-Bot,and so on. How is this possible? I don't even know them neither on Wikipedia nor in any where else. Except Tejas MRCA. I saw him on various wiki articles but I just came to know today that he is too blocked and I don't know about them, I don't know about there socks. I have joined wiki only 3days ago and anyone can check my contributions. I didn't violated not even a single Wikipedia policy after I was blocked for 36hours. Still? Infact I was the first who filled an SPI of Zadon19&his socks. But in reply administrators blocked me. That's not fair, if every new Wikipedian is a sock of anyone by your view than why Wikipedia let us join it and contribute? There are thousands of socks but rarely few of them have been identified and rest innocents are forcefully blocked with tha tag of sock puppet. MCIWS (talk) 10:50, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Just from the behavioural evidence, this is as blatantly obvious a case of sockpuppetry as I have seen for a long time. Add to that the CheckUser evidence, and it is more than obvious. Add to that the further evidence of sockpuppetry that you unwittingly gave in this unblock request, and words fail me to describe how obvious it is. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 13:10, 9 July 2015 (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.

MCIWS (talk) 10:50, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your block is a checkuser-block, made after a thorough investigation confirming you as a sock of an indefinitely blocked user, and cannot be overturned by other administrators without the approval of a checkuser or ArbCom. So why don't you go play outdoors instead of playing silly games on Wikipedia? Thomas.W ^talk 10:58, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]