User talk:Expert in the art of slow slicing

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).

Expert in the art of slow slicing (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

A mistake has clearly been made as I have never previously been blocked on wikipedia, and thus am not evading a block

Decline reason:

CheckUser says otherwise. Tiptoety ^talk 23:17, 30 May 2012 (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 is asking that their block be reviewed:

Expert in the art of slow slicing (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

How can that be? Must be a mistake, some klind of technical glitch. Why was a CU being conducted anyway?

Notes:

In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=How can that be? Must be a mistake, some klind of technical glitch. Why was a CU being conducted anyway? |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=How can that be? Must be a mistake, some klind of technical glitch. Why was a CU being conducted anyway? |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=How can that be? Must be a mistake, some klind of technical glitch. Why was a CU being conducted anyway? |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

I've left a note for the blocking CheckUser. Tiptoety ^talk 23:31, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Checkuser data indicates that this is your other account, which is blocked. Why are you creating multiple accounts, especially ones with racist usernames? TNXMan 14:11, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - That's definitely not my account, I wouldn't create more than one account as I've heard it's not allowed, and I certainly wouldn't create an account with a horrific name like that. Really, it's no wonder the world is so messed up when there are people out there who think like that :S Expert in the art of slow slicing (talk) 21:05, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]