User talk:Slemcal1

"Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Slemcal1" does not exist.
Please use this link to create the category page
(The page will be pre-loaded. All you need to do is save it)

November 2008

This is your last Warning, please stop reverting manipulative edits to your rv in Sam Concepcion, Wikipedia is not a website, second you dont have a references, third your edits were all peacocks.Again Please Stop reverting edits if you dont want to be blocked, just contribute with proper source in every paragraphs, just see [Angel Locsin|this], in its every sentences it has a source,your edits, has'nt. Wynchard Bloom (talk) 03:08, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.. This type of edit will get you blocked regardless of "who's right" in your on-going apparent edit-war. DMacks (talk) 03:15, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Hello. Please stop removing content from User:Wynchard Bloom's user page, its vandalism. If you have misunderstanding, please discuss it in his talk page. Thank you. --Efe (talk) 03:22, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I have not reviewed his contributions yet but deleting his page is a sort of retaliation, which isn't good for all of us here. If you continue deleting his page, someone will revert it, and you will only look "bad". If you feel his doing edits against the WikiPolicy, then we have proper actions to that. I hope that helps Slem. --Efe (talk) 03:45, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

You have been temporarily blocked from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. DMacks (talk) 03:54, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

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).

Slemcal1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I wish to contest my block as i know that i have vandalised the users page Wynchard Bloom but i still find he doesn't receive the same publicity as the people he has been editing and so i find it still a good way to "retaliate" however i admit i am wrong as i should've been more cautious and i do apologize for that. In addition, i do believe that it has been that same user who has been vandalizing celebrity pages on WIKIPEDIA, reverting all edits contributed by fans and deleting majority of the content and making comments such as "peacock" terms were used which is to why he has reverted the edit. These "peacock" terms are not evident in any of the pages he has contributed upon on (or should i say vandalized). Wynchard bloom has been our frustration in the past following days and perhaps weeks as he has only done non beneficial editing to pages that do meet Wikipedia's criteria wherein he should be the one who should be blocked. please investigate upon this issue. "This is your last Warning, please stop reverting manipulative edits to your rv in Sam Concepcion, Wikipedia is not a website, second you dont have a references, third your edits were all peacocks.Again Please Stop reverting edits if you dont want to be blocked, just contribute with proper...t. Wynchard Bloom (talk) 03:08, 18 November 2008 (UTC)" please review his Edits Thanks

Decline reason:

Regardless of whether or not you think you were right, your edits were highly disruptive. You made inexcusable personal attacks against another editor, and your contribution history shows you were using multiple accounts in a severe edit war. I find it quite astonishing you weren't blocked previously for that. Because of the sockpuppetry, I am now extending this block to indefinite length. You may continue to appeal, however please note appeals should focus on your conduct, not that of others. — Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 06:08, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

---

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 can't apologized to the vandalisms you made with my talkpage and userpage for almost three times, also your not needed in wikipedia, coz your contributions are for blogs, but you dont know that wiki is not a blog! You'll be blocked forever and ever, Amen. Also a fault of yours is that you keep on reverting speculative edits to you revision which is wrong, you did it to Sam Concepcion almost many times and i know that you own many IP's which are now blocked because of your many wrong edits with Sam. You have no chance to be unblock, You deserve it!. Wynchard Bloom (talk) 04:30, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

That will be quite enough out of you, Wynchard. Trolling editors who are blocked is quite incivil and markedly unfair, since they are unable to respond. As for whether or not he has a chance to be unblocked, that will be determined by administrators. Please remove yourself from this talk page if you have such a problem with this user, and return to making constructive edits elsewhere. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 06:08, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice, I do. Wynchard Bloom (talk) 10:18, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

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).

Slemcal1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

this is my second appeal for an unblock. This is in regards to the "edit war" that i might have incurred in Sam Concepcion's page. I didn't have any intention of disruptive editing as all i wanted to happen was to revert the edit back to its original state. The "edit war" that i supposedly started can't really be considered a war. At first i didn't know what to do because of my unfamiliarity with the system and so i used undo for all the edits that were done for the past Week which made it look like i was rebelling. I made two accounts during the big edit i did on the page and i am not in denial of that. It is obvious that Slemcal and Slemcal1 are the same users from just even looking at the name. so i really had no intentions of sockpuppetry. Secondly the edit war wasn't really incurred by me as i didn't start the major edit done to the page. Now i am locked from doing anything as well as making a new account or even editing. There has been a user who did a recent edit and now is being accused of us being the same person. It is not me and i have not made further edits. As i said, i have not made any accounts due to the ban and i am more cautious of my actions. I have also stuck to using only Slemcal1 after i made it and have nearly forgotten Slemcal. It is not in the rules (correct me if i'm wrong) that you are only allowed to make 1 account but still it is evident in the name that there is nothing to hide. Anyways, I have been doing research and its stated somewhere in Wikipedia that apologizing is a good thing to do. So i apologize to all those that i have disrupted and vandalized and i guarantee you that none of these will occur again. I have learnt my lesson on how to handle situations like this. Furthermore i was in the process of writing this appeal on top of my first appeal although i have decided to withdraw from it as i thought i didn't have any chance especially against Wynchard Bloom where he mentioned that i'll be "blocked forever and ever, Amen.". That led to the deletion of my first appeal and like from what i said, i am not familiar with the way wikipedia works and still in the progress of learning. Like the saying goes, You learn something new everyday. Again, my deepest and sincerest apologies to all those affected. Thank you

Decline reason:

Well, sockpuppetry doesn't have to be sneaky. The technical aspects of having another account imply that when one is blocked the other can still function, and Wikipedia isn't supposed to have a "lives" system. You may have more than one account but you have to expressly state so that it is visible to all that you own the account; you can't use this account for edit warring if another gets blocked, so I wouldn't encourage this practice. Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP! :)} 04:15, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

---

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).

Slemcal1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

It is clear that "Editing from Slemcal1 (your account, IP address, or IP address range) has been disabled by Hersfold". I couldn't have done any editing after this ban was placed upon me. i even had problems logging on as the password was reset for unknown reasons. Due to my block i cannot request for a new password or make another account or even logon. I'm am still in the process of familiarizing my self to this system. I am now being accused of Sockpuppetry on the account Samsterzai. The person on the page that we are editing is not just somebody with just one fan. He has plenty of supporters, who again, might be inexperienced. Also it states by the last edit before the edit done by what is suspected to be me, that before any more edits done, it has to be discussed on the talk page. I have learnt my lesson and takes more cautious actions, and now from this experience that i have gained, i do know more and not edit at the moment as i am appealing. why would i appeal if i can just make more accounts? and as i said, i am blocked and have been trying to appeal for so long now. It is hard for me to do any editing and now people who randomly jump into our situation is now being accused of me. i made two accounts and it is evident in the name. Slemcal and slemcal1 are nearly identical. And i have explained before about that two accounts in my previous appeal. I am being placed appeals after appeal and it is frustrating. My second appeal is just there to provide an explanation of why i deserve to be unblocked as my ban is set to expire and yet before i am unblocked, i get a new accusation and indefinite extension time. I just don't see how it is possible to sockpuppet in this kind of system. It locks your network and not just the account.

Decline reason:

Ok, I'm willing to give you another chance (I'll consult with the other administrators, but I'm just getting that out there). However, you have to agree to some rules which I'll put below. Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP! :)} 04:15, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

---

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.

Please try to have only one unblock request open at a time. Yours is a complicated case, admins want to take time in reviewing them. I know you feel like no one's listening but someone eventually will act on this one way or the other. Daniel Case (talk) 13:30, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Daniel Case for confirming that my appeal is being investigated upon on. I apologize for having two unblock requests at the same time as i have been placed with block after block and never really have regained my rights. The first Unblock appeal is there to provide an explanation as to my first offense held against me although wasn't really necessary as there has been a given time and date of my unblock. However, that time for my expected unblock changed when i re-checked after a couple of hours and has now been extended to an indefinite time as to when my appeal will expire adding a new offense that wasn't necessarily my fault. Anyways thanks for your kind consideration and for letting me know of my situation. I'm looking forward to the resolution of this problem hopefully in the near future. Thanks again.

Ok, here's some rules you'll follow in the future:

1. Only edit using one account, no matter how similar the names.
2. Do not edit war with another user, even if they are edit warring with you. Contact one of us instead. You can read on what an edit war is here, and how to get help with one. Just never edit war.
3. Do not antagonize other users. This is not appropriate no matter the circumstances; same with this. And don't take the "eye for an eye" approach like you said here.
4. Be civil. Shouting "I'll block your face" is unacceptable.

Can you agree to those? If so, as I said previously I'd support unblocking you though unfortunately I'd check back every day or so to see that things are going ok. Cheers, Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP! :)} 04:15, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes sir. I agree very much to your rules and i have indeed memorized them so that i can avoid situations like this. I'd be happy for you to check everyday as i will still be keeping in touch with you and hoping to improve my knowledge on how wikipedia works and also my unfinished business with Wynchard. Looking forward for the unblock and hopefully you would help me with my further arguments. I now know more now to than disrupt and vandalize pages. Thanks for your kind consideration. (Slemcal (talk) 06:58, 21 November 2008 (UTC))

Also, what about this account? Seems like another sock, as it made the same edits as you... Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP! :)} 04:37, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Yah Samsterzai is obviously a sock of him. He again reverted my edits on Sam Concepcion to his fannish and blog type revision. Maybe he thinks that Admin will not block his socks. Huh! Wynchard Bloom ^{contact me}_{My work} 04:59, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Like i Said, My apologies to whatever happened. "ill Block you face" warring and all is the result of my frustration over the war. was relatively new to wikipedia and didn't know the rules and regulations before, which really is the reason why i made two accounts. I didn't know how to revert changes without undoing, which i have learnt now. nevertheless, I have promised that none of this will ever happen again as i have learnt my lesson. after a ban was place on me, i have also mentioned that i was blocked from even logging on and it was impossible for me to log on. Also, wikipedia tracks not only the ID but the Ip Address and therefore i could not have done any editing. Samsterzai couldn't be my sockpuppet as we are not the only ones trying to revert to the original. If you review the history of the page, all i did was revert the article back to its original state, before Wynchard bloom has done contributory edits. Once im unblocked, i have written my side of the arguement as to whether who is incivil and unfair between the two of us. first, im just waiting until i get unblocked. And once that happens, I now know who to consult. Furthermore, Hersfold has warned Wynchard to "Please remove yourself from this talk page if you have such a problem with this user" and yet he is still coming back to make comments. (Slemcal (talk) 06:26, 21 November 2008 (UTC))

These conditions seem reasonable, provided Slemcal is aware he will be again blocked indefinitely should he violate those restrictions. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 05:56, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Can you check this user my dear Hersfold because Slemcal said that its not his sock, we'll admin see's IP Address used by Wikipedians. If You Slemcal and this user's IP Address were the same meaning your lying and its your sock. Wynchard Bloom ^{contact me}_{My work} 06:45, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

I believe i do deserve a second chance as after my first block i have never been unblocked ever since. Samsterzai isn't another sockpuppet of mine as i couldn't even do anything with any accounts and if s/he is my sockpuppet, why would i write three consecutive appeals for my unblock and wait for a long time to be unblocked. Also i have read the previous edit done by an Administrator which stated that any further edits must be first discussed in the talk page. As i said, Im not the only person who supports Sam Concepcion. And im not the one who put the article up together, just reverting whatever edit has been done. From this experience, i know that there is no point to edit war, and before i do any changes, i know i must consult one of the administrators here first. As i said, I didn't know anyone before this incident and now i do. Because im still trying to appeal my Unblock, i have taken hersfolds advice and that is "you may continue to appeal, however please note appeals should focus on your conduct, not that of others". so i did what she has adviced me to do and haven't really attacked anyone except just defend myself. And yet i see no improvement with my block. Sorry if im sounding a bit desperate and out of my lines however, to be blocked with no freedom is really demeaning. again i have apologized so many times and never really had the chance to prove myself or even get second chances. I only got one warning and have been automatically suspended from my rights.(Slemcal (talk) 06:26, 21 November 2008 (UTC))

Hmmmm, Sorry but I dont believe with you Slemcal, Only you reverts my good edits on Sam Concepcion and no one. Now your obviously lying, we'll its a reason might admins will not unblock you. Its your fault again. Do you know taht lying is Evil? Wynchard Bloom ^{contact me}_{My work} 06:45, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Mate, You're making an assumption, which i find you're really good at. I, myself, do know and 100% certain that they won't be similar. I am not in denial and not afraid to defend myself. I know that even though she made same edits as me, Im not the only one you're in "edit-war" with. Take a look at other pages, especially celebrities from the Philippines. Lots are against you and im not surprised is Samsterzai is too. Plus, Haven't you been told to leave this page? hmm i wonder who that person that doesn't understand and takes advices easily is.(Slemcal (talk) 06:58, 21 November 2008 (UTC))

We'll Banned user I'm telling you not to be dependent that admin will unblock you because as what i said before. You will be Blocked Forever and ever Amen.! Hahaha Wynchard Bloom ^{contact me}_{My work} 07:03, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Slemcal1

Its better not to unblock him/her because he keeps on making new accounts aside from Slemcal, Slemcal1 also created this account, Samsterzai which is now blocked and even if you unblocked him still he will not changed and still he will stil put fannish statements on Sam Concepcion, its better not to unblock him anymore. Its my opinion! Wynchard Bloom ^{contact me}_{My work} 04:33, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Wynchard, as I've said before, knock it off. As you can see, we're considering that, and working with Slemcal to make sure it doesn't happen again. I would again ask you stop editing here for the time being, and go back to article work. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 05:43, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

But I'm just only informing you that he again created another sock, Well if you mean weird for that then I'm very sorry Hersfold. Wynchard Bloom ^{contact me}_{My work} 06:08, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Upon reviewing Wynchards comments, Please don't be influenced by this person as i am telling you, i am the one who hasn't had any chances of complaining, only defending myself. Like hersfold said, my first attempt in my Appeal focused entirely on me trying to debunk wynchard while i wasn't in the position to do so. I have been waiting impatiently for the administrators decision and once it my ban has been released, I will not start "edit wars" nor "attack" such as "ill block your face" or even insults. I will put forward my argument once my ban has been fixed and i am certain that it will change your view of our situation. Administrators hold their own decision as to whether who will be blocked or not. If i was an Admin, i would actually find it insulting for someone like Wynchard who is a general user/wikipedian just like me being able to go around saying you will be blocked because he is always the first one to complain to the proper authorities. Before this I didn't even know there were administrators and you guys, Hersfold, Master of Puppets, Dmacks and Efe in particular but from this experience now i do. If you realized, He has been in tuned to whats happening and is always commenting on my situation. Is he even an Admin? He is probably scared of what could happen once i get the freedom to talk to you guys. Also if you have noticed, he vandalized my page and put a "banned" tag on my main. hmmm, acting Administrator ey. Is that legit? (Slemcal (talk) 06:46, 21 November 2008 (UTC))

Its not a vandalism Slemcal, your look like stranger! I only did it to your userpage and talkpage because its a fact, what do you feel pala your not banned from editing, you dont have socks? Huhu, are you dreaming Slemcal. Of course its just normal to put tags on your userpage. And you deserve it! LoL. Wynchard Bloom ^{contact me}_{My work} 06:51, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Uh? Hello are you still there? hahaha. are you still acting administrator? you don't know if im banned or not as your not an administrator. And if i was, how come someone took that ban tag off? a fact ey. Perhaps maybe you're dreaming. you're are lucky i haven't reported you as i am still blocked. But i hope administrators can see this and what you are doing to my page. i thought i was the only one disruptive. Wonder what they call that... (Slemcal (talk) 07:06, 21 November 2008 (UTC))