MohammedMohammed

Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Avoiding warnings. NeilN ^{talk to me} 15:17, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

April 2017

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I'm not sure who has made this accusation. I understand the other user (Ontario) and I have been two of many many users opposing Korny's disruptive edits on the O'Leary page. Korny has inserted an opinion piece faming O'Leary as Canada's Trump, and has been trying to edit war it in 3-4 times per day for 4 months. Korny has even gone as far as to label both O'Leary and Trump "crazy" on the talk page, and has requested that his disruptive edit be left until after the next federal election. Seeing as there have been many users opposing these disruptive edits, I'm not sure why I'm being picked on here. I have not seen any proof to back up this accusation. I guarantee you that there is no way Ontario has made any edits from my IP address. I suppose there is a slim possibility of a public WiFi somewhere we may have both used once, but even still, I doubt it. Can someone please provide me with a link to some actual proof? I'm suspicious this accusation may have been made for political reasons, or as a means to gain an unfair editing advantage.

Decline reason:

Checkuser-confirmed sockpuppet. This evidence does not rely solely on IP addresses. Yamla (talk) 12:02, 16 April 2017 (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.

MohammedMohammed^محمد 04:32, 16 April 2017 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

So the only so-called evidence is that we both opposed Korny's changes? There haves been several other editors who have opposed these disruptive changes as well, like Mike77, Vaseline, and Charles to name a few. I was involved in the O'Leary WP page before any of these other editors (including Ontario). My views also differ from Ontario's as I was providing a compromise version, while Ontario preferred the original. This makes no sense.

Decline reason:

Clearly you did not read the decline reason above. This is a Checkuser-confirmed sockpuppet account. Please read this page for a summary of the technical data available to Checkusers to confirm such issues. Black Kite (talk) 13:54, 16 April 2017 (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.