De Sable

Nick-D (talk) 07:46, 17 September 2009 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

I'm just making regular updates to fatality reports, and the like. I am not breaking any rules as far as I know.

Decline reason:

I am declining your request for unblock 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
  • understand what you have been blocked for,
  • will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
  • will make useful contributions instead.

Please read our guide to appealing blocks for more information.. — Daniel Case (talk) 14:36, 17 September 2009 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

For the longest time I have been unsure as to why I have been blocked several times, but after reading the block/ban policies extensively it seems I have been mistaken for a known abuser named Top Gun. apparently my "pattern" of editing is similar to his, and I would like to set the record straight that I am no such guy. Granted I have went under guest IPs, but I did not know that this made me all the more suspicious. Anyway I am sorry for whatever mistaken trouble I have caused. If you look you will see I have done nothing malicious or vandalized any pages. Please unban me. Wikipedia's standards were much more complex and detailed compared to the independent wikis I help edit.

Decline reason:

Yeah, your story doesn't really wash, Top Gun. I wouldn't buy this one with counterfeit money! Do yourself a favor - stop acting like we're all imbeciles. Declined. —Jeremy ^{(v^_^v Boribori!)} 12:20, 23 January 2010 (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.

• As a note to the reviewing admin, I blocked this editor as a sock puppet of indef blocked editor Top Gun (talk · contribs) per WP:DUCK as their contribution history was exactly the same. Top Gun has been attempting to evade their block through the use of multiple registered and IP accounts - please see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Top Gun/Archive, Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Top Gun and Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Top Gun. The fact that this unblock request starts with "For the longest time I have been unsure as to why I have been blocked several times, but after reading the block/ban policies extensively it seems I have been mistaken for a known abuser named Top Gun" while this editor's block log shows only a single block makes it pretty clear that this isn't an honest or legit unblock request, but rather Top Gun trying to reactivate one of their accounts. Nick-D (talk) 10:04, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
  • Again I am not any of these people. I am not a vandal, sock puppet or any of the sort. You can keep me banned, but I am innocent. My "blocks" were before I got a username, because I didn't want to get one, and then after I got this (Which is of course banned as well) I switched back to just using guest IPs because I just didn't know how to proclaim my innocence in the matter. Apparently this was a mistake. I should have read the block policies. Again I said before and I will say it again. I am not Top Gun or any other vandal/abuser. I'm just a guy who was interested enough in the Taliban fatalities to go and update it with other reports. --De Sable (talk) 19:36, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
    • After looking at Top Gun's supposed or known IPs I can say that IP 98.156.123.135, 89.156.239.187, 89.156.232.188 are definitely mine. However the rest are not. I know it sounds far fetched, but this is a big coincidence. Again I would like to say I am sorry for all the confusion this has caused. If I had known that this Top Gun had been such a problem I would have registered earlier. I didn't realize until recently that my IP actually changed when I would come to this website. Again I say Wikipedia is a little bit harder for me to understand than the independent wikis where most often edit are a bit more simple. Please whoever is reviewing my case, unban me. I am innocent. --De Sable (talk) 02:02, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
      • Just saw that my request was denied. Do what you wish but I AM NOT TOP GUN. --De Sable (talk) 20:15, 21 February 2010 (UTC)