Ishqbina

Other usernames

Hi Ishqbina, your contributions don't look like those of somebody new to Wikipedia. Have you been editing long? Do you have, or have you had, any other usernames? --Simon D M (talk) 11:45, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

And how look contributions of new people on WP ? Is it a suspicion because of your own exeprience ?--Agenor 77 (talk) 16:34, 3 February 2008 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

why was I blocked?

Decline reason:

See below. That is not a reason for unblock. — Sandstein (talk) 09:19, 9 February 2008 (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.

Your block log says the block is for abusing sockpuppet accounts. Just an observation both monobooks [1], [2]are the same.--Ѕandahl 05:38, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

hmmm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Bookofjude/sandbox2 Ishq (talk) 11:26, 11 February 2008 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

no valid reason for block

Decline reason:

Abusing sockpuppet accounts is a valid reason to block. Since no other reason to consider unblocking this account has been provided I am declining to unblock Gwernol 14:11, 11 February 2008 (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.

• Being a sockpuppet of a blocked user (Sfacets) is a valid reason for a block. If you want to a) dispute the claim that you are a sockpuppet, or b) appeal against your previous block using that account, please indicate that in your unblock request. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 12:03, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

I have not been abusing sockpuppet accounts though. Isn't there supposed to be a process that aims to prove that a user is a sockpuppet? How can a user (who apparently has conflicts) simply block another one because he or she has a suspicion? Ishq (talk) 19:17, 11 February 2008 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

I would like to edit without needing to change ip address - there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that I am a sockpuppet of the aforementionned user. Please give a valid reason why I remain blocked, or unblock me please. Ishq (talk) 18:03, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Your edits follow the same pattern as Yogasun, Sfacets, etc. — IrishGuy ^talk 18:57, 23 March 2008 (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.

Please stand by whilst I contact the blocking administrator, to request an elaboration as to evidence regarding sock puppetry. AGK § 18:34, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Ishq (talk) 22:28, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Any luck with that? Ishq (talk) 01:39, 26 March 2008 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

Reasons given above. Ishq (talk) 06:08, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Reasons for decline are also elaborated above. Behaviourial evidence is serious enough. MaxSem^{(Han shot first!)} 08:59, 28 March 2008 (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.

No reason is given above. Oh well back to Ip hopping :) 124.168.186.165 (talk) 06:33, 29 March 2008 (UTC)