User talk:Smhhalataei

Notification

You have been mentioned at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Smhhalataei Edward321 (talk) 13:38, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Blocked for sockpuppetry

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

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

---

Request reason:

Please provide a reason as to why you should be unblocked.
Change {{unblock}} to {{unblock | reason=your reason here ~~~~}}

Notes:

• In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
• Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=original unblock reason |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=original unblock reason |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=original unblock reason |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

Smhhalataei (talk) 17:45, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Unblock request

Over the course of the year I was engaged in three cases with Edward321 and DeCausa. All of these cases have been handled by one admin : Bbb23. That chance that this happened by accident is zero. The judgments that I have received are quite unfair too. Edward321 and DeCausa are obviously collaborating on suppressing any other voice in the Mahdi article. I filed a case about their sock puppetry and submitted tons of evidences, Bbb23 took the case and simply wrote it has no "basis"!! I couldn't believe the judgement. Please just take a look at this collaboration by them to eliminate a different voice in the Mahdi article : [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]. Now please explain to me how could they be unconnected when they collaborate so well in eliminating a person and its edits ?

If the verdict is to block me for two weeks, they should be blocked indefinably if Wikipedia judiciary wants to be anything close to just. Here I request an unblock for myself and a permanent block for them.