Damianbolek

June 2022

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Bbb23 (talk) 22:25, 10 June 2022 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

I was blocked for something I didn't do. I didn't make any persistent changes. I made constructive, truthful edits, especially on the sites with which I am personally associated. Ban by mistake. Damianbolek (talk) 22:54, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

Decline reason:

There is no mistake. I also think unblocking you will require a topic ban from Polish politics, though that will be up to the next reviewer, not me. 331dot (talk) 23:24, 10 June 2022 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

Stop lying. Of course it's a ban by mistake, because I didn't break the rules.

And if you think I broke it then PROVE it for me. Prove that any edition I have ever made has been untrue. Damianbolek (talk) 00:07, 11 June 2022 (UTC)}

Decline reason:

I can see we're wasting our time here. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:53, 11 June 2022 (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.

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

---

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

UTRS appeal #59468

is closed. Needs topic ban, broadly construed, on Confederation Liberty and Independence. Needs to evince understanding of reliable sources and dispute resolution. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 06:05, 13 June 2022 (UTC)