User talk:SharptoothX

Ref

Please add a reference per WP:MEDRS Thanks. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 17:09, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Specifically content should be supported by a secondary source rather than a primary one. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 17:37, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

no

	no
	no Metaphidippus manni (talk) 23:17, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet of Wagner (talk · contribs · global contribs · page moves · user creation · block log) that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Rs chen 7754 09:23, 14 January 2013 (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).

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

Request reason:

I am completely serious when I say I am not Wagner. I am not, and I am disgusted that you think it fine to block accounts so readily. Wagner pulled me into this, and I would not like to lose my account now. I want to edit articles for good. That is my purpose for being here. Wagner's purpose is different. I know I have no more evidence up my sleeve, and my editing behaviour can be similar to Wagner (he has greatly influenced me in the past, being a very close friend of mine); all I ask for is one more chance. I don't mind if I'm completely monitored. I just want to prove that I'm doing everything with good intentions. I also promise to not let Wagner (or WikiVoid, if that suits you, and I am still stressing that he is not Wagner or me) influence anything I do as an editor. Please. I could change my IP address and start afresh, but this site's regime is tough and Wagner will probably try to screw the new account over, again. I also quite like this account name. I'd rather not have to think a new one up! Thanks for reading. Someone please have compassion.

Decline reason:

I've seen this before. Talkpage access revoked. Reaper Eternal (talk) 02:07, 16 January 2013 (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 would suggest that your only chance of achieving an unblock, other than a routine request through your primary account (which you deny) is to e-mail the blocking admin. The socking evidence appears convincing.--Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 17:15, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is what I don't understand. The evidence is limited to Wagner's various socks editing things that I edit, and that's because he follows my edits. Just look at the revision history of this very talk page. I find myself constantly battling his socks. It's quite frustrating. SharptoothX (talk) 17:18, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The evidence is not solely limited to what you are editing, and also see WP:BROTHER. --Rs chen 7754 18:17, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I fail to understand how WP:BROTHER is relevant. I never said anything about my account being controlled but anyone but me. SharptoothX (talk) 18:52, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]