User talk:Minden jacob

Conflict of interest

You clearly have a conflict of interest in regard to BankVic -- and may well be the username-blocked User:BankVic1974 editing under another name -- so, please read our policy on editing with a conflict of interest and our terms of service requirements in regard to paid editing. Please do not edit the BankVic article directly again. Instead, please make suggestions for change on the article's talk page, and allow other editors to make the changes if they deem them suitable. Thanks, BMK (talk) 23:50, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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/Minden jacob, 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.

Dat Guy^Talk_Contribs 09:07, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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/Minden jacob, 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.

Dat Guy^Talk_Contribs 09:07, 24 January 2016 (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).

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

Request reason:

this is not a sock puppet account. I am sorry as I originally edited the page as I found incorrect information through the account and was alerted to it when I searched the website. I am not affiliated with BankVic I am a keen member of theirs who hopes to make a difference. I promise not to do it again. I am having trouble however finding secondary sources of the information that the original website has.

Decline reason:

You are obviously the same person as User:BankVic1974; after that account was blocked for promotional edits, you resumed making the same edits with this account. We call that "sockpuppetry." OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:20, 12 February 2016 (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.