User talk:Couchbeing

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).

Couchbeing (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:

Unblock request closed pending outcome of your RFCU. MaxSem^{(Han shot first!)} 07:04, 26 April 2008 (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.

Edit: I do not know who this Sfacets is that WIllbeback is talking about.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Couchbeing (talk • contribs)

I have contacted the blocking administrator to provide additional information about this block. Please be patient while we await his response. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 12:47, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've emailed information to Jayron showing links between the accounts. Among them are campaigns by both users to remove category:cults from articles about groups, and to add category:Anti-cult organizations and individuals to other articles. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 21:03, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence provided by Will Beback via email is pretty extensive. Based on this evidence, I have requested a checkuser case at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser. If you are not Sfacets, you will be likely cleared by this checkuser request. If you are Sfacets, then the checkuser will confirm that as well. Please be patient while this is investigated. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 18:04, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

I am curious which part of the checkuser "showed" that I was Sfacets - unless that user has used the same computer (which I find highly unlikely) - please provide evidence of shared ip addresses.

Decline reason:

A trusted individual has reviewed the IP addresses from which this account and Sfacets contributed and determined they are the same. This means the same computer was used to make edits from both accounts. Therefore, you are sockpuppeting. This is in violation of policy. Per WMF privacy policy IP addresses will not be released. Unblock request declined. — MBisanz ^talk 00:43, 30 April 2008 (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).

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

Request reason:

I see that Will Beback has been blocking users he accuses of being sfacets without any evidence (see link below). Request another checkuser - there is simply no way sfacets has used the same connection as me.

Decline reason:

Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Sfacets confirmed the sockpuppetry. This matter is now closed. — Yamla (talk) 01:46, 2 May 2008 (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.

Will Beback has been blocking an impressive! amount of users and ip addresses (clearly some of the ip addresses are similar) without evidence. [1].