User talk:Mightyboosh99

September 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Mark Brake has been reverted, as it introduced negative or controversial biographical material without providing a reliable source for this information. Wikipedia requires that all such material be sourced to address the issue of libel. Thank you. Ronhjones ^(Talk) 00:01, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the reference Mightyboosh99 (talk) 00:14, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did with this edit to Mark Brake. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 06:55, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Will do Mightyboosh99 (talk) 07:02, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked for a period of indefinite for disruption / confirmed sockpuppet of User:Rhevans 41. To contest this block, please reply here on your talk page by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} along with the reason you believe the block is unjustified, or email the blocking administrator. For alternative methods to appeal, see Wikipedia:Appealing a block. Rjd0060 (talk) 02:02, 7 September 2009 (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).

Mightyboosh99 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have been blocked. I wish to appeal this block. I am NOT Rhevans_41, but a different user using the same IP address. Also, can you explain to me what the label "sockpuppet" means. I have reason to believe that Rosit is now posing as another user, namely Warlockio (see entries on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Mark_Brake. I have not made disruptive edits to the Mark Brake page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Brake, but rather entered into a debate on the Talk:Mark_Brake page. Mightyboosh99 (talk) 07:49, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Per checkuser, you're either a sockpuppet or a meatpuppet, either is which is a valid reason for a block. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:22, 7 September 2009 (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.

And by the way, the checkuser I talked to (User:J.delanoy) said it was "confirmed". - Rjd0060 (talk) 14:27, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A sockpuppet is an alternate account used against policy - please read WP:Sockpuppetry. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 11:22, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What is a meatupppet? What is checkuser? Thanks... Mightyboosh99 (talk) 22:01, 7 September 2009 (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).

Mightyboosh99 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have now read the policy on sockpuppet. I didn't realise you had to declare if you were using the same IP address as another user. I am a friend of RhEvans_41 (who has been blocked), using the same IP address (a different computer tho'). I have an interest in the Talk:Mark_Brake page as RhEvans_41 and I have had many long conversations about Mr. Brake and his behaviour and credentials. I would like to request that a check is done to see whether Warlocko and urbanclearway are not, in fact, sockpuppet accounts for Rosit. Thanks. Mightyboosh99 (talk) 22:23, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I just ran another checkuser, and I endorse J.delanoy's conclusions. As for the other check, that is not relevant to your case, and we do not run checks without sufficient evidence to justify the need for a checkuser. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:25, 7 September 2009 (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.