User talk:Sevenneed

Sockpuppetry case

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Spookee for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. KelleyCook (talk) 15:03, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

January 2008

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating 3RR and using Spookee (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) as a sockpuppet account. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 16:31, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So even the Wi-Fi industry lobbyists have infiltrated Wikipedia... (Sevenneed (talk) 18:26, 22 January 2008 (UTC))[reply]

I'm not a Wi-Fi industry lobbyist. I'm a Wikipedia administrator who knows when users are violating Wikipedia policies. And there are plenty of things in this world that are more likely to kill you than a Wi-Fi router. Try driving along Interstate 694 in New Brighton, Minnesota, for example. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 18:34, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shame on you... (Sevenneed (talk) 18:52, 22 January 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).

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

Request reason:

No direct, convincing proof of sock puppetry. And more importantly I merely added 'misleading', 'incomplete', 'neutral' to the section and hope that a more balanced viewpoint can be presented. See the TALK page of Wi-Fi. I thought Wikipedia is supposed to be neutral and complete?? If parents were to read and believe every single sentence under 'Question of Health Risk' and thereafter be convinced that Wi-Fi is totally harmless to their children who may be using Wi-Fi for several hours a day, they may later live to regret when research proves otherwise in future. Just like what happened to Asbestos and Smoking. History has taught us to always adopt a precautionary approach. And Wikipedia will have to explain to these parents why its articles have not been more complete and unbiased!

Decline reason:

Socckpuppet or not (and that's a pretty dubious "or not", you edited disruptively and fail to assume good faith when you assume all reversions of this article are done by telecommunications industry lobbyists. — Daniel Case (talk) 19:00, 22 January 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.

Sock block

This account has been blocked indefinitely as an abusive sock puppet of Spookee (talk · contribs) per Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Spookee. Jehochman ^Talk 18:30, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]