User talk:PapaJeckloy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


RETIRED
This user is no longer active on Wikipedia.
Stop hand nuvola black.svg
This user has retired on the English Wikipedia and other Wikimedia Projects and may comeback at a very low chance.
If you contact him. In all likelihood, He will not reply.


Welcome to my talk page. Here are some tips to help you communicate with me:

  • Please continue any conversation on the page where it was started.
Thus, if I have left a message on your talk page please DO NOT post a reply here. I will have your talk page on watch and will note when you have replied.
  • Add or respond to an existing conversation under the existing heading.
  • Indent your comment when replying by using an appropriate number of colons ':'.
  • Create a new heading if the original conversation is archived.
  • To initiate a new conversation on this page, please click on this link.
  • You should sign your comments. You can do this automatically by typing four tildes (~~~~).


Blocked for sockpuppetry

File:Orologio rosso or File:Orologio verde DOT SVG (red clock or green clock icon, from Wikimedia Commons)
This blocked 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). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

PapaJeckloy (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribsdeleted contribsabuse filter logcreation logchange block settingsunblock)


Request reason:

Please kindly check me again if i'm neutral, i think i have been blocked because of my recent wrong contributions on DYK and it is brought on the Project page's Talk page and an administrator probably saw the report there by a user that requested to place sanctions me within me fastly and block me now to close the investigation even we're not finished discussing with the CheckUser,i admit the reason of that is because i lack of experience, I try to defend my self and in matter of fact, we have an ongoing discussion with DeltaQuad (talk · contribs) and he is asking me question about the investigation and it is done privately so it's not included in the discussion and he said that he will add more questions to me if it is needed and seems like he did not see my latest reply as of the moment most probably because he is offline, WP:Evidence is not that notable for blocking an innocent user, It is not confirmed so why did you blocked me? (just asking don't be mad), please kindly check me again if i'm neutral and we are ongoing discussion on his talk page with the CheckUser that is DeltaQuad (talk · contribs), who assisted in checking me and the accused socks, and please kindly ask the CheckUser to give his analysis on the accounts including mine, he just put a likely tag due to my behavior but not in technical reasons, because our IP's do not belong in the same location and not the same, Many thanks! I accept this block, i just appealed this for personal reasons, Please also take note that even DeltaQuad (talk · contribs) said that his decision is not final yet and he can revert his decision if he sees my answers truthful and looks like he is not yet online to see my latest reply on his talk page, we are discussing about the sock investigation privately, Please see User:DeltaQuad's talk page for evidence. (To the sysop who blocked me: Don't be mad, i'm not angry or something else, i just want to clarify this, I still respect your adminship and i do not take it personally if you blocked me or not. :}, Cheers and have a good day!) -PAPAJECKLOY (hearthrob! kiss me! <3) (talk) 08:52, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Decline reason:

CheckUser  Confirmed abuse of multiple accounts. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:51, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first and then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page for as long as you are blocked.

(Comment from uninvolved editor) The evidence is compelling enough without CU results, and the name you chose for one of your socks shows your contempt for the system. I am more concerned about what will happen after your week is up, and how we can protect the main page from you, given that you are not willing to take responsibility for your actions. HelenOnline 10:45, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
FYI I have re-opened the SPI as we seem to have missed at least one other sock. HelenOnline 12:28, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Halo 5: Guardians

I am curious how you can take credit for the Halo 5: Guardians DYK on your user page when you only made one unsourced edit to the article that was reverted on the day it was featured on the main page, after the DYK nomination had already been promoted? HelenOnline 13:34, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Any volunteers?

I have left a retirement notice on the top of my talk page, so can anyone put it also on my user page and removed all, It would be appreciated for my whole life, as i may not come back again and this is probably my last edit on WP. -PAPAJECKLOY (hearthrob! kiss me! <3) (talk) 14:09, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. -WayKurat (talk) 15:32, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Due to your continued socking, I have extended your block to indefinite. Indefinite is, however, not infinte; I'd suggest you consider taking the WP:STANDARDOFFER in any return to editing. - The Bushranger One ping only 16:06, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
File:Orologio rosso or File:Orologio verde DOT SVG (red clock or green clock icon, from Wikimedia Commons)
This blocked 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). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

PapaJeckloy (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribsdeleted contribsabuse filter logcreation logchange block settingsunblock)


Request reason:

After almost a month of getting blocked, I know many other users don't want me back, but I loved Wikipedia so much that i can't quit editing, I'm very sorry for my very noob actions and I apologize for the problems I brought to other users, giving them headaches and messing up this community. I just want a willing user who will test my eligibility here and how can I contribute to the wiki, I want to make significant and useful contributions. I just don't know what I am doing way back before then, because of lack of experience in the Wiki. But I am assured that of 23 days of training to become a good user and reading and studying the policies and guidelines mainly giving attention on the behavioural policies, I must be ready now, you can test me. All I want is to be a good user now, No further excuses. I'll promise if you give me one last chance, I'll never waste the opportunity as I can contribute also. -PAPAJECKLOY (hearthrob! kiss me! <3) (talk) 09:18, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Before we go any further, I want you to provide a complete list of accounts that you have created. PhilKnight (talk) 13:51, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first and then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page for as long as you are blocked.

Unblock request

File:Orologio rosso or File:Orologio verde DOT SVG (red clock or green clock icon, from Wikimedia Commons)
This blocked 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). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

PapaJeckloy (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribsdeleted contribsabuse filter logcreation logchange block settingsunblock)


Request reason:

I also appealed few hours ago and the admin who checked the case said I need to provide all of the accounts I have created so I will do this again. After almost a month of getting blocked, I know many other users don't want me back, but I loved Wikipedia so much that i can't quit editing, I'm very sorry for my very noob actions and I apologize for the problems I brought to other users, giving them headaches and messing up this community. I just want a willing user who will test my eligibility here and how can I contribute to the wiki, I want to make significant and useful contributions. I just don't know what I am doing way back before then, because of lack of experience in the Wiki. But I am assured that of 23 days of training to become a good user and reading and studying the policies and guidelines mainly giving attention on the behavioural policies, I must be ready now, you can test me. All I want is to be a good user now, No further excuses. I'll promise if you give me one last chance, I'll never waste the opportunity as I can contribute also.

I have created several accounts, I'm very sorry that I do so, that's because before I am not familiar with the guidelines (but it's past). I am honestly saying that I created these accounts. I said this honestly because I want to prove myself that I have changed. I am sure that I have changed, I almost got depressed because I miss editing, but I want to show everybody that I'm not rude anymore that I did before. I realized my wrong actions and understands why I became controversial, I'm just very rude before that upto now I feel sorry for myself.

User:PapaJeckloy's lover- A legitimate declared alternative account before, blocked because of my case.

User:Gelkia31, User:Gongon3336, User:Gelacost Mouse, User:EtitsNgKabayo- socks. --PAPAJECKLOY (hearthrob! kiss me! <3) (talk) 14:14, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Decline reason:

I don't think so, no. You've done what's one of the worst possible things on Wikipedia: creating multiple accounts so as to feign consensus. That's downright fraud, and you don't seem to understand just how destructive that is to community here. Intolerable. --jpgordon::==( o ) 17:47, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first and then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page for as long as you are blocked.

I would like to point out that it has been only three weeks—21 days—since PapaJeckloy was blocked. Not "almost a month", or 23 days; even now, the request is guilty of exaggerating, and the admitted socks above were being vociferously denied right up until the original block occurred. Given the damage PapaJeckloy did at both DYK and GAN—he used his socks at the former to approve his own articles and promoted articles he'd reviewed, both against DYK policty—it's far too soon to let him loose to do anything. If for some reason the block is lifted, I think there at least needs to be restrictions against participating in those areas until PapaJeckloy can demonstrate responsible editing elsewhere. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:05, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
I would tend to concur with this. PapaJeckloy not only used socks to approve DYKs, but ultimately caused an article containing a blatant copyvio image to appear on the main page. Should an unblock even be considered, I would strongly advise the admin to make it conditional on accepting a topic ban from DYK, GAN, FAC, and all related processes (especially those where content can be put on the main page). —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 02:49, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
Just to add on BlueMoonset and Mendaliv's comments, the administrator that will check on this case should consider the aggressive/rude behavior he showed to other editors (including myself), on top of what big mess he did in DYK and GA. To Jeckloy, learn to accept criticism and take it positively. For the past months that you have edited here, whenever I correct your grammar, you took it negatively and started attacking me. If someone added information on an article that you are focusing on, you delete it and say rude things on the editor. And please, if you edited an article and nominated it in DYK, you should acknowledge the other editors who painstakingly edited them before you and don't own all of the credits that comes along with it. You showed that behavior to me and others in multiple instances. -WayKurat (talk) 11:15, 4 October 2014 (UTC)