User talk:Abhinav008
October 2011
[edit]Blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet
This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet 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 it 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. Dougweller (talk) 09:33, 28 October 2011 (UTC) |
Abhinav008 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I admit that I used multiple accounts in wikipedia. I admit my mistake and feel sorry for that. I request you to unblock this account. I promise that I will not make/use any other profile. Actually I am new to this wikipidea. So I was unaware about the policies. Earlier I didn't even know how to discuss on talk page. That's why some member would have complained against me. But now I have thoroughly read all the policies. I will not use any other profile except this one. So kindly unblock me or atleast tell me my block period, so that I can know when will I be unblocked. I shall be thankful to you. Regards Abhinav
Decline reason:
Definitely not. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mrpontiac1/Archive WilliamH (talk) 14:35, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
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.
- Could you list your other accounts below, so we know who you are? --Jayron32 13:26, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
- OH. That's who you are. If you want to be a positive contributor to Wikipedia, see WP:STANDARDOFFER. That's the only possible hope you have. --Jayron32 14:39, 28 October 2011 (UTC)