User talk:RFVWSXEDC

RFVWSXEDC 02:39, 23 May 2007 (UTC) Please do not add unhelpful and unconstructive content to Wikipedia, as you did to Mullah Obaidullah Akhund. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. GhostPirate 19:15, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Abdul Latif Hakimi, you will be blocked from editing. GhostPirate 19:17, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

<<unblock| I haven't made any edits since the third level warning and I'm not plamming to. I started off with good edits. And I was testing. unblock me so I can make good edits. REVIEW MY REQUEST. I AM WAITING. QUICKLY I AM WAITING RFVWSXEDC 01:52, 22 May 2007 (UTC)>>[reply]

Clearing an autoblock

Please note that we cannot unblock you at this time because you have not given us the information we need to look into your block. It is very likely that you are not personally blocked. If you are prevented from editing, it may be because you are autoblocked or blocked because of your IP address. Without further details there is nothing further we can do to review or lift your block. If you are still autoblocked by the time you read this message, please follow these instructions:

If you have a Wikipedia account, please ensure that you are logged in.
Your account name will be visible in the top right of this page if you are.
If it isn't, try bypassing your web browser's cache.
Try to edit the Sandbox.
Copy the {{unblock-auto|...}} code generated for you under the "IP blocked?" section.
Paste the code at the bottom of your user talk page and click save

If you are not blocked from editing the sandbox then the autoblock on your IP address has already expired and you can resume editing. -- Netsnipe ► 02:46, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Y	Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s): Autoblock of 65.93.216.56 lifted or expired. Request handled by: -- John Reaves (talk) 05:21, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You say it is expired. But, I still can't edit. HOW COME I STILL CAN'T EDIT. RFVWSXEDC 11:19, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Y	Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s): Autoblock of 65.93.216.56 lifted or expired. Request handled by: // Pilotguy hold short 21:22, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

REVIEW MY REQUEST QUICKLY. I CAN'T WANT ANY LONGER. IT DOESN'T TAKE THAT LONG. HI, ADMINISTRATORS. RFVWSXEDC 20:04, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

65.93.216.56 was hard blocked, which appears to have affected multiple users. I believe I've edited it accordingly (to allow logged in users to edit), so you should be able to edit now. Please let me know if you can edit by posting here; if so, I'll clear the unblock request as successful. --Kinu ^t/_c 21:03, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I could edit. remove the request

- Oh, apparently by "multiple editors" we mean "sockpuppets"... thank you to the (re)blocking administrator for correlating the IP with these accounts and reinstating the necessary blocks (i.e., fixing my mistakes). --Kinu ^t/_c 14:42, 23 May 2007 (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).

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

Request reason:

What did I do after my autoblock has been lifted? And I don't get the reason that I'm blocked. What is Safwwefe? What does it mean. I am confused. RFVWSXEDC 02:39, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Decline reason:

It means you are blocked as yet another sockpuppet of that editor. - auburnpilot talk 03:14, 23 May 2007 (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).

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

Request reason:

What? I am not a sock puppet of any editor. Leave me alone. I haven't made any bad edits since the autoblock was lifted. I only made 3 bad edits in total ( they were tests and aren't bad-faith) and not planning to make more. How am I a sock puppet? Even give one evidence. This is not fair. RFVWSXEDC 19:31, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Yep, sock. Evidence is comprehensive and compelling. KillerChihuahua^?!? 23:21, 23 May 2007 (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.

I have looked into the evidence, and you now have been reviewed by two admins, in addition to the blocking admin. I am protecting this page to prevent any further spurious unblock requests. I suggest you find another hobby. KillerChihuahua^?!? 23:21, 23 May 2007 (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).

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

Request reason:

Please I am NOT a sock a Safwwefe. Who is Safwwefe. Come on and I only made 3 bad edits in total ( they were tests and aren't bad-faith) and not planning to make more.RFVWSXEDC 01:14, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Per other two admins reasons. I would also like to add you would have been blocked by me for the username violation (random letters). — —Ocatecir ^Talk 04:00, 2 June 2007 (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.