H.M.Revenue (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
The reason for blocking is my contributions. To an independent administrator (not the person that did the blocking), please explain with relevant and linked evidence how they justify being banned. --H.M.Revenue (talk) 13:58, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Your contributions to the now deleted Magellan (book) overlap significantly with those of two other editors. Together, your edits and those of the other editors match those of a previously banned user, General Tojo. As Tojo is banned from the project, all accounts used to edit on his behalf in this manner are also blocked. Thus, you are blocked indefinitely. Should you wish to request a review of your community ban, you will need to do so by request ot the Arbitration Committee. Best, UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 14:43, 8 July 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.
I challenge you to show me, with evidence, how my edits match those of General Tojo - whose edits were all preoccupied with Parkinson's Disease. In stark contrast, I made only about one edit concerning Magellan - a sixteenth century discoverer who did not have Parkinson's Disease. You are being ridiculous, and have not provided any evidence at all to back up what you've written. You have none, so why is the block maintained ? --H.M.Revenue (talk) 16:02, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
H.M.Revenue (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Nobody has been able to provide any actual evidence in the form of referenced edits justifying the ban. All we have so far is unsubstantiated claims that don't stand up to even the slightest scrutiny. Nobody should be blocked without original evidence.
Decline reason:
Checkuser confirmed. Page protected. Mangojuicetalk 17:28, 8 July 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.
--H.M.Revenue (talk) 16:05, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
- I would note, for the benefit of the reviewing admin, that this request was added prior to the checkuser evidence provided below, which very clearly shows that abusive sockpuppetry took place. Best, UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 17:24, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Checkuser result
editFor the record, as I am a checkuser here, it is 
Confirmed that the following accounts are one and the same, given that they've edited from the same IP address at the same time, and share many other characteristics. IP location correlates closely with Tojo's location, so it's pretty obvious what's happening here, expecially given the exhortations of "check my IP / I know what Tojo's range is".
- Juan de Leon (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- H.M.Revenue (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Jan Van Leer (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)