User talk:Luckydan89
|
Sockpuppetry case
[edit]You are suspected of sock puppetry, 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/Lawline. Thank you. JohnInDC (talk) 02:11, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
==================================================================================================
[edit]I have had an account with Wikipedia since 2008. My User page indicates college student. This is the only account that I have with Wikipedia. Most of my comments and edits have involved gaming. I have never abused the account.
I heard about the abusive, malicious, and vindictive comments from User:Mendaliv who made an anology between Louis Posner and Ken Lay and Jeff Skilling, the major players in the Enron scandal. I was outraged and I gave my opinion on the discussion area for articles for deletion for the subject. Luckydan89 (talk) 05:40, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
- You have been blocked indefinitely for the abuse of multiple accounts per the findings of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Lawline. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:49, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
Luckydan89 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
This User was blocked as a sock puppet of Lawline. However, Lawline should have never been blocked in the first place and Lawline which was blocked in 2011 should be unblocked. The real story about User:Lawline is that an Administrator was making edits to an article written by Lawline. The Administrator had no knowledge of the subject area but engaged in cyber bullying against Lawline to get her way. Lawline indicated that he disagreed with some of her edits. Lawline also advised the Administrator that some of her edits could be viewed as libelous under New York law. However, Lawline NEVER threatened to sue and always respected the rights of Wikipedia and the Administrator. The Administrator then turned things around and claimed that Lawline threatened to sue Wikipedia which was not the case. The Administrator did this as a ploy to block and ban Lawline so she could could get Lawline out of the way and edit the Article the way she wanted to. Following the banning of Lawline, every User that in any way was associated with or supportive of Lawline was blocked and banned as a "sock puppet" of Lawline. Included in the "sock puppet" list was User:LuckyDan89 who was a college student who had been a Wikipedia user for over 5 years, and who was banned for making one small edit on a Lawline article. This User has never abused any accounts, has never vandalized any articles, and intends to continue as a productive member of the Wikipedia Community.
Decline reason:
Identical unblock request to other confirmed Lawline socks. Yunshui 雲水 11:29, 13 January 2014 (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.