User talk:SYDNEYres

Official portraits

Because for living people, Wikipedia only allows free images. If an image has not been released in to the public domain, it cannot be used. Thanks. Timeshift (talk) 07:47, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clearing it up --SYDNEYres (talk) 07:52, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

lulz... clearly this account was always a sockpuppet based on the infoboxes added and the unusually explicit edit comment upon adding them, and asking me a silly question. I wonder how many more times this person will re-create accounts before giving up and realising now that we know, we'll be catching them out each and every time? :) Timeshift (talk) 05:43, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Look how many edits i have done and still have lots to offer especially writing demographics on NSW electoral districs, I have turned over a new leaf, please consider that fact. --SYDNEYres (talk) 06:36, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is true that I am KAPITALIST88 = AusRight = SYDNEYres = Conservative in 2010 but that was only because I knew that anyone would not believe me that I could turn over a new leaf. --SYDNEYres (talk) 06:40, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What part of indefinate ban don't you understand? Timeshift (talk) 07:26, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that I was blocked from my own talk page so that I could not contest the ban --SYDNEYres (talk) 07:31, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You've been instructed on ways to contest it without using your talk page. I think even that is too generous considering your actions. You don't deserve to ever return IMHO. Timeshift (talk) 07:42, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

IMHO I HAVE changed and can provide a valuable service to Wikipedia and you have to admit when you didn't know that I was the former KAPITALIST88 instead some new guy called SYDNEYres who edited A LOT of NSW electoral districts and added a good paragraph on demographics on 2 of them you were like pretty good, but when you realised that i was the former KAPITALIST88 you immediately went into attack mode and started sledging me without even taking into consideration that I have rehabilitated --SYDNEYres (talk) 07:59, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was like pretty good? What are you on? I wholeheartedly endorse the below unblock decline and any future such instances. Timeshift (talk) 08:46, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My blocking

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).

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

Request reason:

Yes I admit that I created an account because my previous account which was KAPITALIST88 was blocked but that was only because I knew no-one would believe me that I could turn a new leaf and I have done all my edits according to Wikipedia's rules and expanded many articles relating to NSW electoral districts and I have written them from a NPOV, so can you please consider that fact. According to Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks one reason stated is that if 'The block is no longer necessary because you understand what you are blocked for, you will not do it again and you will make productive contributions instead'

Decline reason:

Creating an account to bytpass a block is not doing all your edits according to Wikipedia's rules. Please read this section of Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:41, 11 January 2010 (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.

FYI for admins

I appear to have received an email from this user via the wikipedia email feature, and it goes as follows: Hello, you and I have seemed to be at loggerheads for a while now and since I was blocked it has made me realise that I need this website and it needs me because I believe I have so much to offer to Wikipedia about Australian politics and because I like this site. My sheer desperation on not being able to edit obvious errors on Australian political articles had enraged me so I created a new account called "SYDNEYres" and in less than 2 days I made 65 contributions to articles and I knew that it was wrong and against Wikipedia's guidelines concerning sockpuppetry but I believe that I have rehabilitated and am not a threat to security on Wikipedia anymore, thanks.

Uh-huh. Timeshift (talk) 13:12, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This may be relevant if/when this user makes a request from his/her original acount; it's not relevant for any requests made from this one. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 16:08, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]