User talk:Mdata20

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).

Mdata20 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I was editing this article then I found myself being blocked indefinitely ! .. Moreover, all the edits were reverted even though they were sourced ! Mdata20 (talk) 23:41, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This unblock request is unconvincing in light of this. Unblock requests must come from your main account. Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 23:49, 4 November 2018 (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.

Reason !

@Sir Sputnik: Why is it allowed for you to ban people from writing here ?! I am writing about football here, this platform is not owned by you to block us ! you suspect that I am related to other accounts because I used their edits which are correct, I saw the edits earlier so I re-added them. I read the archive when you say some acts "seem like a duck" ! I am not that person but if you want to penalize me for using their edits, it is fine ! but not an indefinite block ! Mdata20 (talk) 23:56, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Kevin: You have zero evidence that I am the same person, read the argument written above ! Mdata20 (talk) 23:57, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock

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).

Mdata20 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Duck-like-acts are not valid enough to block people as I discussed earlier ! read my statements carefully, by your aggressive censorship, you really drive people to do sockpuppetry ! I noticed that the user who blocked me is a socialist, how relieving ! Now you would say: don't attack others personally, even though he blocked me for good ! Mdata20 (talk) 00:04, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Admitted and obvious sock puppet. Talk page access revoked. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:35, 5 November 2018 (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.

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If the block is a CheckUser or Oversight block, was made by the Arbitration Committee or to enforce an arbitration decision (arbitration enforcement), or is unsuitable for public discussion, you should appeal to the Arbitration Committee.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.