Cryingjohn 1972le

Welcome!

Some cookies to welcome you!

Welcome to Wikipedia, Cryingjohn 1972le! Thank you for your contributions. I am Cntras and I have been editing Wikipedia for some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• How to write a great article

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Cntras (talk) 11:53, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Sockpuppet investigation

You are suspected of sockpuppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the notes for the suspect, then respond to the evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ryan kirkpatrick. Thank you. YSSYguy (talk) 23:17, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

May 2012

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).

Cryingjohn 1972le (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Just minor spelling mistakes in my part don't make me a sock. All the accident which I have made I have checked on the Notability guidelines for air accidents and they meet them sanders. I do put up my hands and say yes I made mistakes. I will give you my word they will not happen again. Can you please unblock me.

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

• the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
• the block is no longer necessary because you
  1. understand what you have been blocked for,
  2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
  3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 14:16, 19 May 2012 (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.

Not continue to cause damage or disruption, I am sorry I have done none of that of that. I was blocked because some blamed me for being Ryan. I have done nothing wrong. I'v helped Wikipedia, people have even edited my work to make it better. I am sorry I done nothing wrong. I flowed all the guilds lines presented to me. All the articles were notable and made seance to the reader. They only blocked me cuz I said "a accident" in one of my articles. Just that small mistakes means I get blocked and all my work deleted. I am sorry u lot are mad in the head.

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).

Cryingjohn 1972le (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I will not do any more damage or disruption to Wikipedia and will make useful contributions instead.

Decline reason:

The idea that you were blocked just because you wrote "a accident" is just so far from the truth. You evidently are blind to just so many different ways that you give yourself away, in addition to the checkuser. As for your claim that you "will not do any more damage or disruption", it is difficult to give much weight to that while your claims that you you have done no "damage or disruption" and that you "have done nothing wrong" are still in operation. JamesBWatson (talk) 20:31, 19 May 2012 (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.

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).

Cryingjohn 1972le (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

really what the hell you on about that was the reason I was blocked cuz I made one error and i ant done nothing worng. Are you lot really that stupid. Oh wait you are.

Decline reason:

Calling other people stupid will not get you unblocked. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:37, 19 May 2012 (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.

• This may be a waste of my time, but I will try just once more. You are not blocked because of one mistake: there are a whole lot of different pieces of evidence. You obviously aren't aware of them, which is, of course, good, because it means that you won't be able to avoid giving yourself away if you decide to waste your own time and everybody else's by creating another sockpuppet account. JamesBWatson (talk) 22:31, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

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).

Cryingjohn 1972le (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Ok fine I am sorry I call you stupid. But really whatis wrong the I told you I will not damage Wikipedia any more what can I say for you to unbloack me. Do you what me to say that I am Ryan if that will you unblock me?

Decline reason:

If you're Ryan, request an unblock from that account. We don't unblock socks. Max Semenik (talk) 23:01, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

• I would do but I can't edit my own talk page because of the block. That is way I made other accounts.

---

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.

If you are banned by the community or Arbitration Committee then you must request unblock on your original account by emailing the Ban Appeals Sub-Committee or ask the community to reassess your ban to see if it is still valid. An admin cannot overturn a ban by fiat. —Jeremy v^_^v ^Bori! 22:09, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes. And because your only use of this talk page is to waste our time by trying to bypass that process, your talk page access has been removed. JamesBWatson (talk) 16:53, 20 May 2012 (UTC)