User talk:Paior

Huh? I am Jon Paior Nominee for Eastwood / Glenunga Ward.. Why am I suspected of multiple accounts?

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).

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

Request reason:

I have nothing to do with Miley1990 or whatever... I am Jon Paior http://www.geek.on.net/jon-paior-small-business-expert.html Why the ^%& have I been blocked? Is this an attempt to stifle democracy?

Decline reason:

I accept that the evidence of sockpuppetry is not totally convincing. However, on the basis of your very limited editing history to date, it looks as though your only purpose in editing Wikipedia may be self-promotion, which is against Wikipedia policy. Is there any editing not related to yourself or your business that you would expect to do if you were unblocked? JamesBWatson (talk) 14:16, 24 September 2010 (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.

I Quote: And sorry, missed one more - Paior (talk · contribs) is on a different ISP than all the rest, but is using an identically configured computer and is in the same geographical area. I'll call it Likely especially considering other Miley socks have appeared on that range (but less commonly). Hersfold (t/a/c) 05:14, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Guys you got this one wrong: ping www.geek.on.net and www.paior.com you will get my IP 203.122.236.239. I am who I say I am... Paior (talk) 12:53, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I am running for councillor position and I will be adding to the Wiki. I simply do not understand your position. I have only the one account and I simply added (under the column "information") some simple factual information about me... following the format of a previous edit (by someone else - about someone else). Please unblock me, this is ridiculous...

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).

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

Request reason:

This my only account and I have never abused or done anything against the T&C. My Blocking was simply an innocent mistake made by an administrator and I request that it be reversed. I don not wish to create a new account for two reasons: 1: If I do then I actually will be in breach of T&C and 2: I have used my real name for my login, as you might guess, I am quite attached to it. :) Paior (talk) 10:29, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Thius does not address the concern of JamesBWatson above. Sandstein 20:07, 25 September 2010 (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).

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

Request reason:

I did address the concern... I said: "I will be adding to the Wiki." If you require further clarification: As a resident and a statesman I will be adding to both my local and virtual community. I will be adding factual information that relates to the City of Burnside. Because I am using my real name, obviously I will not wish to tarnish my career by adding false or misleading information.

Decline reason:

Based on your deleted contributions, you will be adding information about yourself to Wikipedia. This is clearly inappropriate - especially when that information includes a link to your own website, which is clearly a case of promotion. If I am incorrect in this assumption, perhaps you could give some examples on this page of some articles you would like to add information to, what information you would add, and some reliable independent sources which would verify that information. I've added a template below this decline message for your convenience (please note, you do not need to copy the whole of the article, just the relevant sentence(s). -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 09:01, 28 September 2010 (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.

If possible, for the sources use the following formats:

Newspaper-name, date-of-publication, author, title, page(s)

Book-name, author, publication year, publisher, ISBN, page(s)

Article I would like to edit: Replace-this-text-with-article-name-but-leave-square-brackets

Current text: Replace-with-the-text-currently-in-the-article

My revised version: Replace-with-the-text-of-your-revised-text

Source(s) for my information: Replace-with-sources