User talk:Talikarni

Hello, Talikarni, and Welcome to Wikipedia! Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! SwisterTwister talk 05:06, 9 February 2012 (UTC) Getting started Introduction The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Intuitive guide to Wikipedia Finding your way around Table of contents Department directory Editing articles How to develop an article Manual of Style Getting help Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Where to ask a question Help pages New contributors' help page Article Wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles How you can help Contributing to Wikipedia Community Portal Join a WikiProject Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility

Blocked for sockpuppetry

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).

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

---

Request reason:

This block is invalid by Wikipedias own Terms of Use as this is a single user account, created and used by one person, with no other accounts. There were not multiple accounts created nor used from this user, IP, account, address, associated email address, nor location. Furthermore, the block is invalid as the originating editor that reported or recommended the block (I am NOT referring to Mike V but another editor, unless the other editor AND Mike V are the same person, which is a much more serious problem) has been the subject of multiple third party reviews as being racist against whites (refusing to allow correction of racist anti-white articles with verifiable and reputable sources), commonly reverts and locks articles whenever there is facts that editor (NOT Mike V) disagrees with, and has been a problematic editor as reported on various social media sites and forums. Due to the forced reporting and blocks instigated by the originating editor, the people (like myself) attempting to request lifting the block are typically denied. As so many social media comments most commonly and so bluntly puts it, "the wikipedia admins are protecting their editors instead of admitting certain editors need to have their elevated status revoked". They institute bogus blocks such as sockpuppet in order to give reason behind their blocks, instead of looking at the originating editor that reported the issue in the first place. As a police officer and fellow editor of Wikipedia put it, "There are lots of good editors on Wikipedia but there’s a bad group  of admins. . . They make it hard.” If the site owners wish to contact me outside of this site, I can give the name of the originating and problematic editor that caused me and so many others these problems. (Talikarni (talk) 01:27, 11 February 2016 (UTC))

Decline reason:

Firstly, I accept that this may be the result of meat puppetry instead of sock puppetry, but the block is still justified. Secondly, I suggest you look at WP:NOTTHEM. PhilKnight (talk) 01:01, 18 February 2016 (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.