User talk:Juror 8

Welcome!

Hello, Juror 8, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! From: (→Netscott) 04:36, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Richards

Greetings, you may not be aware of it but utilization of a revert tool in the manner you did here across a good faith edit is seen as very uncivil. Revert tools are meant to be used primarily for blatant vandalism. Thanks. (→Netscott) 04:36, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I never reverted over any good faith edits. I reverted over a blatant vandal who was trying to remove content from the article. Why should my reverting of vandalism be considered vandalism and his reverting of a good faith aid not be vandalism? I don't think you even looked at this situation, but rather, disagreed with the content that I added, and let your own personal opinion cause you to side with the rever-vandal, even though my addition to the article has a source and citation. Juror 8 05:34, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

False sock puppet claim

How can you claim that I am a sockpuppet there is no evidence of this can you please tell me which user I am supposed to be a sock puppet of? This is a balatantly false sock puppet claim. Juror 8 05:15, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry but I am not a sock puppet of "Mactabbed" I think you completely made up that name. Now please provide proof of why you blocked me. This is admin abuse. Juror 8 05:20, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You need to explain yourself now. Juror 8 05:24, 3 December 2006 (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).

Juror 8 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

There is no proof that I am sockpuppet of this "Mactabbed" user. I looked at his edits, and the only similarity is that we both have edited the Michael Richards article, an article that is editted by hundreds of unique users each day. That alone is a very weak proof. I suppose all editors with dissenting opinions on the Michael Richards article are sockpuppets of "Mactabbed". How many others have you falsely accused of this? Simply put, I am not a sockpuppet of "Mactabbed", and this accusation is ridiculous and frivilous. The case that I am a sockpuppet is based on the fact that I installed popups upon creating this account, hardly indicative of sockpuppet behavior. I used to have a wikipedia account but forgot the login name, so I created a new one and the first thing I did was install popups, a behavior common amongst some new accounts. The other point was that I editted the Michael Richards article, but that is out because hundreds of people a day edit that article since it has become a current event. The other case is that I contacted an admin reporting another vandal, and this one confuses me the most. How does contacting a well-known admin whose name was the first I found, and they say they want to clean up vandalism, implicate me as being a sock puppet? This seems like it was simply tacked on to the rest of the reasons as further "proof" that I am a sockpuppet, all because you think I'm a sockpuppet of some user I have never heard of.

Decline reason:

No, sorry, but your editing pattern is the same as your other puppets and your immediate use of pup-ups and screams of "abuse" when anyone comes near you all shine out to prove who you are, even at the most cursory glance. Goodbye. -- ➨ ЯEDVERS 16:39, 4 December 2006 (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.

Note to reviewing admin: Please check the history of this talk page and also be sure to confer with User:Pschemp prior to unblocking. (→Netscott) 07:34, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]