Wikipedia talk:Long-term abuse/DavidYork71

If the user is requesting to be unblocked then should this be deleted?  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 10:18, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
 * In view of the disruption created by the number of socks, and distress and disrepect to editors at the time of the insistent abuse, no. JarrahTree 10:23, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
 * At least we should wait until they are unblocked and have made productive contributions for a few months.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 10:26, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
 * That would be fine if there had been WP:AGF behind the vast number of socks (at least 700 hundred created) and the disruption that caused JarrahTree 10:42, 22 April 2018 (UTC)


 * if the user requesting to be unblocked, then IMHO it shouldnt happen the user has a long history of abuse and disruption over 100's of accounts, and IP's. Even if this user was ever allowed to continue then there should be an absolute zero tolerance, with content bans related directly or indirectly to Islam, Israel, Terrorism, and BLP's, with banning being the first and only response. All of the these sockpuppet, and administrative pages should be retained. Procedurally since the community banned him via consensus his request to OTRS should be referred back to the community with full disclosure of every account and IP used to avoid the ban, whether previously identified or not. Gnangarra 10:55, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Agree re appropriate mechanism - from memory this was a community ban; it would require community consensus to lift per WP:UNBAN. -- Euryalus (talk) 11:49, 22 April 2018 (UTC)