Jump to content

User talk:D'Agrò

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by Infrogmation (talk | contribs) at 02:40, 2 April 2009 (Reverted edits by 207.69.137.36 (talk) to last version by D'Agrò). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
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).

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

Request reason:

I'm not a sockpuppet. Please check my Ip, do a Check User I'M NOT A SOCKPUPPET AND I DID'N ANY ILLEAGAL PROCEDURE!

Decline reason:

As noted at WP:RFCU, requests for checkuser to prove your purported innocence are rarely accepted, so please do not ask. As noted here, most administrators will decline as a matter of course an unblock request that makes such a request. I wrote that section. I'm one of those admins. — Daniel Case (talk) 20:10, 5 October 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).

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

Request reason:

I need your help, please. An administrator named "Jehochman" blocked me. I'll try to write to in a civil manner, but i'm really-really upset.Why do he blocked me? I'm not a sockpuppet of this "Giovani Giove". If SOMEONE HAVE DONE a check user of my Id's, can easily ahe checked this!I've just been so unlike to come across a voice "Giovanni Luppis" the has been edited by him previously and when he got a lot of disputes, referring to the voice history.I edited this voice only because Giovanni Luppis is one of my ancestor on maternal side so I'm QUITE aware about his origins, family and ancestry.He blocked me without having even done a check-user!!!He blocked me without having even READ the ridiculous "evidences" "against" me...! Because, if he would have done it he MUST have seen that the UNIQUE "allegations" are WRONG and/or FAKES, as I'm already stated here. Infact AlasdairGreen27 wrote there that: "New user D'Agrò's first contribution was to reinsert an image [1], uploaded by GG [2]"... but this is TOTALLY absurd, because is WRONG/FAKE!!!In fact the image I reinserted [3] IS NOT the same uploaded by that "Giovani Giove[4]!I already wrote this to the administrator "Tiptoety", asking him if could be possible to erase from my user page the sockpuppet allegations BECAUSE I HAD NOTHING TO DO WHIT THIS and he told me "yes". So, why now an other administrator blocked me?Which are the reasons?There are NO ALLEGATIONS, NO EVIDENCES and NOBODY MADE A CHECK USER!I'm intent to accept this. this "Jehochman" declared: "I am blocking the named accounts based on behavior." (!) Which behavior? What I did that is not allowed on wikipedia?I'm sure someone will help me because my case will be reconsidered and unblocked me quickly I'm ready to give any other details, just ask.Waiting a quick and kind reply I'm ready to prove my real name sending a copy of my documents id, to prove that i'm not this Giovani Giove! Thanks M.

Decline reason:

The fact that you are currently avoiding your block by editing your own user page while logged out shows that you are indeed a person who is willing to avoid a block. The evidence suggests that you are the user you are accused of being. A checkuser would be pointless; by changing your ip address to edit your user page, you have already demonstrated that you are knowledgeable enough to change your ip address, so checking to see if you are using the same ip would not reveal anything useful. — FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:03, 5 October 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.

What are you seinG????? I'm not so stupi to can't understand that If I can't edit my own talk page ( and the n WHY because it is write that also blocked user CAN edit is own talk page?) I'm not so stupi to dont know that I can edit it whit an IP. I'm not inten to avoid ANY block, BUT THOS BOLCK IST INJUSTICE!!!! The foirst thing I did is have sent THREE email to the administrator how blocked me an to other two administrators TEHRE ARE NO REASONS FOR THIS BLOCK. PLEASE, READ THE "ALLEGATIOS" AND ANYBODY CAN CHECK THAT THERE ARE NO ALLEGATIONS AT ALL! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.80.59.63 (talk) 21:08, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You aren't logged in right now as User:D'Agrò. You've logged out, and are using an anonymous ip. So how can I know you are User:D'Agrò? I know because you're continuing a conversation that User:D'Agrò was having, and you're doing it in User:D'Agrò's distinct writing style. That's also how we know you're User:Giovanni_Giove. Please stop creating new accounts. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:12, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

THIS IS PURE KAFKA!! I'M NOT CREATING ANY NEW USER ACCOUNT I'M NOT THIS GIOVANNI GIOVE! THERE ARE NO EVIDENCES AGAINST ME, PLEASE READ THE page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Suspected_sock_puppets/Giovanni_Giove_(6th) SOMEONE MISUNDERSTAND EVERITHINK!--91.80.59.63 (talk) 21:15, 5 October 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).

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

Request reason:

I read one more carefully this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser#Giovanni_Giove the allegations said: that "all of the three accounts" did something... but my account is not AMONG THOSE THREE! IS different. Against my account there are NO ALLEGATIONS AT ALL. Nobody wrote that I'm writing in the same style as this "Giovanni Giove". The unique allegation against me is PROVED WRONG. They accused me to have "reinserted an image uploded by this "Giovanni Giovi" but this was a mistake because the image I reinserted WASN'T the image upoleded by this "Giovanni Giove" but it is A DIFFERENT IMAGE! So WHY I must be blocked if there are NO REAL ALLEGATIONS against me?

Decline reason:

The unblock reviews by the last 2 administrators explained the rationale here pretty well. — Cirt (talk) 23:01, 6 October 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.

You have not even read WAT i WROTE! shame OF YOU!--D'Agrò (talk) 23:18, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:D%27Agrò&oldid=281212349"