User talk:ScoutCruft

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).

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

Request reason:

I am not a sockpuppet of user:R00m c. I don't even know who that is. Please unblock me! -- ScoutCruft (talk) 23:29, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Sorry, you're also blocked for disruption, and this reason doesn't address that. You were tagging a large number of pages for notability concerns in quick succession, including many that are inherently notable, even after being asked to stop. — Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 02:33, 23 April 2008 (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.

If not, you both seem to share an interest in mass tagging articles on Scout camps. It seems rather obvious that this is not your only account. If Room c isn't your main account, what is? --B (talk) 23:49, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is my only account on Wikipedia. I have been an active reader of wikipedia for a long time and I have worked on other wiki projects for years -- why would you assume that I must be a sock puppet? ScoutCruft (talk) 03:31, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:DUCK. — Rlevse • Talk • 09:54, 23 April 2008 (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).

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

Request reason:

On behalf of this user I am requesting an unblock. See Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/R00m c. No evidence of sockpuppet usage, and we sure as hell don't make indef blocks for minor offenses like this. It's already been a few days, so he's probably gotten the point by now, and deserves another chance. -- Ned Scott 05:15, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This user's first edit[1] makes it cleat that (s)he is not new to Wikipedia, no matter whose sock they are. MaxSem^{(Han shot first!)} 06:05, 27 April 2008 (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.