User talk:Datch71s

somali and cushitic history

Edits

I would appreciate you not revert the edit I am going to make to the page. I will be adding part of Morocco history banner on Yusuf's page, I dont want an editor wars hence I am notifying you ahead. Please reply with your thoughts. Salam Magherbin (talk) 19:33, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Listen, you're conflating Sheikh Abu Baraka with Aw Barkhaadle. Two different Sheikhs who both have a similar history of spreading Islam to the Maldive islands. The sources I provided stated there were two Sheikhs. You're confusing the Morrocon one with the Somali one so please instead just make your own page and feel free to use my sources.

Unblock

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).

Datch71s (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I'm from London. A new user interested in history and Habar Awal King is not from London and is not interested in history. I have been banned for no reason. I wish to request an unban because I'm been contributing positively in Wikipedia

Decline reason:

Confirmed sock puppetry. Bbb23 (talk) 18:25, 7 January 2019 (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.

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).

Datch71s (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Help i am not a suckpuppet this is the only account i used i have never used any other account this is a mistake, i am wrongly accused of suck puppetry, i wish to request a proper investigation in to my matter this is a complete misunderstanding i will persue this unjustly matter furthur untill i prove my innocence

Decline reason:

Unambiguous, Confirmed abuse of multiple accounts. —DoRD (talk) 12:19, 8 January 2019 (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.

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).

Datch71s (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

i am not a suck puppet i am wrongly accused of bieng a sock puppet . I wish to request an unban because I'm been contributing positively in Wikipedia. Help i am not a suckpuppet this is the only account i used i have never used any other account this is a mistake, i am wrongly accused of suck puppetry, i wish to request a proper investigation in to my matter this is a complete misunderstanding i will persue this unjustly matter furthur untill i prove my innocence

Decline reason:

Checkuser verified abuser of multiple accounts. It's really unambiguous. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇} 18:16, 9 January 2019 (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.

@Bbb23: @5 albert square: I don't see this username anywhere in Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Habar Awal king/Archive. Would you please explain how this account came to be blocked? ~Anachronist (talk) 21:37, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For various reasons, not all sockpuppets end up listed at SPI. The relevant discussion is still visible on 5 albert square's talk page. —DoRD (talk) 17:34, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@DoRD: 5 albert square blocked this, but didn't reference any evidence. I see now on his talk page that Bbb23 identified it as "likely". Other admins need more information than this when evaluating an unblock request from an account that appears to make constructive edits, and doesn't even associated with the SPI case.

@Datch71s: Please don't make more than one open unblock request at a time. I have removed the redundant one. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:06, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is a waste of everyone's time. I've reblocked the account as a CU block and revoked Talk page access. Anachronist, please note that although I made findings of likely, I also said that Datch71s is Confirmed to Hash23as (talk · contribs · count).--Bbb23 (talk) 18:42, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]