User talk:Veesicle

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

---

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

---

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

Blocked

I have blocked you for abject stupidity. It's kind of hard to imagine what else you would have wanted, given that edit. Guy (Help!) 13:53, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Alright :) User:Veesicle 13:54, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

And I have unblocked. That was not a reason for a block without warning in any way shape or form. Viridae^Talk 05:28, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

I've reblocked but for only 24 hours. The edit to David's page was completely unacceptable and you should have known better. JoshuaZ 05:37, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

That works. Viridae^Talk 05:38, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

What a surprise to see my name on ANI. Thanks for the notification... User:Veesicle 18:43, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

No, I did not expect an indef block nor 'want' one. It was a momentary lapse of judgement brought on by my frustration with the template wording ("Expresed a concern"? Give me a break) and obviously a pretty stupid thing to do. I didn't argue with the block as from my observations I can see that people who get blocked indef and request unblocking somehow magically end up with their talk pages protected. User:Veesicle 18:47, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

And Guy, your comments about 'not that much of a contributor' are a bit rich coming from someone who spends most of their time bitching people out on ANI and arguing about policy. User:Veesicle 18:48, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

But I of course apologise to David Gerard for making such a lame attempt at a point, even though he does not appear to be bothered. :) User:Veesicle 18:50, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

RfA

I considered not spamming talk pages but not saying "thanks" just isn't me. The support was remarkable and appreciated. I only hope that I am able to help a little on here. Please let me know if I can help you or equally if you find any of my actions questionable. Thanks & regards --Herby ^{talk thyme} 11:43, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Blocked

You have been checkuser-blocked for abusive sockpuppetry. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 15:46, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

You have been indefinitely blocked from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for abusive sockpuppetry. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 16:05, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Really? Who is my sockpuppet? User:Veesicle 17:06, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

• Under checkuser policies, the details of the IP sockpuppetry you've been amusing yourself with may not be released to the public. They're just IP numbers, anyway. I've not yet blocked the multiple usernames you've also been using. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 18:13, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

• IPs are me just being too lazy to log in; I've never votestacked or anything of the like. I've been editing semi-constructively from IPs for a fairly long time, I only resumed use of this account recently to participate in the ArbCom elections. Multiple usernames? Let me know when you do block them, then, I'd be interested to see who they are. User:Veesicle 22:30, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

• Oh and feel free to post whichever IPs you feel that I've abused, I have no qualms about my IP usage remaining private. User:Veesicle 23:31, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

• Seconded, the checkuser data is clear and obvious. (Josh has asked other checkers to review.) - David Gerard (talk) 16:19, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
• Doubly seconded. From what I've seen this is very clear. James F. (talk) 16:36, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
• Redoubled ➥the Epopt (talk) 17:40, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

• Okay, I guess I'll just reset my router and start a new account. Catch ya laters. User:Veesicle 00:13, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

• And note that this does not mean that I accept allegations of abusing accounts. Just that it's much easier to start a new account than argue with people who refuse to give me the evidence against me, even via email. User:Veesicle 00:15, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

• And I'm looking a Jpgordon's block log and am not seeing the name of a single account I recognise [1]. Hmm, funny that. User:Veesicle 02:05, 19 November 2007 (UTC)