User talk:24.228.90.14: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 23:37, 19 December 2011

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 16:32, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been warned, when you edited from your account, not to mess around on the reference desks. You have been blocked for continuing to do so. TNXMan 18:16, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text , but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. TNXMan 18:16, 26 October 2011 (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).

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

Request reason:

on one hand this was a fair block, but on the other hand it is not fair at all. i asked a lot of intelligence questions, and none of the questions i asked on the rference desk were stupid, they were of a thought provoke nature. I would like the community to review the length of this block because i am not sure i asked any stupid reference questions in the past several months. thank you. 24.228.90.14 (talk) 19:24, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

See below. Your comments indicate that you do not understand why you were blocked, despite warnings here and at your prior account. Based on your comments below, there is no evidence that the problematic behavior would stop if you were unblocked. Jayron32 21:07, 26 October 2011 (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.

Before any decision is reached, could you list any other accounts you have edited under? This is so we can tell how far-reaching this pattern of behavior is; that would give us an indication of how likely it is to repeat. --Jayron32 19:58, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I LIKE TO EDIT ANONYMOUSLY. and i have lots of internet ip in the past for many years but i forgot wut i[ address they use. when i have to log in, i log in as Fran Cranley. but that is my real name so pls do not publicize it, and it is my ONLY ACCOUNT.

Since you've admitted it, a brief review of Special:Contributions/Fran_Cranley should assist the reviewing admin. TNXMan 20:06, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WHY WOULD I NOT "ADMIT" IT!!!!!11 U R A CHECK USER, SO U CAN SEE FOR YOURSELF.

Please remain calm -- a hot temper won't help your case at all. I understand that you enjoy posting those questions, but I don't think I'm inclined to unblock you if that's all you're going to do. It's not really what the reference desk is for. – Luna Santin (talk) 20:12, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

i am calm. i just had some caps lock on. sorry, also i will edit other pages too if unblock me and i will only do 1 or two question on the ref desk each day AT THE MOST but most days i will do ZERO questions, just as i have in the past. like one time i made some productive writing and copyedits to Jabba the Hutt article, u can see for yourself.

It isn't the number of questions. If you believe that you were blocked merely for the number of questions you asked, I can see no reason to unblock you then, as you do not appear to have a level of self-awareness necessary to conform your behavior to acceptable norms. --Jayron32 21:07, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OMG MY BLOCK IS ALMOST EXPIRE.

I've reblocked you. Reaper Eternal (talk) 15:17, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of a fortnight for persistent vandalism. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Reaper Eternal (talk) 15:17, 19 December 2011 (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).

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

Request reason:

I know i ask some silly question in the past. but this is not VANDALISM. i asked if human poop (i.e., feces) always contains e. coli. i am sorry if this makes some ppl giggle or uncomfortable, but it is a serious question and it have to do with illness and disease and food poisioning, and it is a legitimate question. i dont see any thing "vandal"-istic about it. please tell me wut i did wrong. Also, I see that user:Kainaw is spreading untruths about me as u can see here[1]. I am not "regularly" asking questions about poop, anus, uranus?????? where is the evidence for this. I asked ONE question about e. coli and human poop today and i dont believe I EVER asked questions about anus or uranus and i did not "vandalize" an article yesterday, i just added some facts about amoebas that I read in the news. This is really unfairness. also i am requesting review of this blocks by a NEUTRAL ADMIN and not someone who is prejudice against me and my account that i used in the past (Fran Cranley). i wuld like an UNINVOLVED admin to pls review this block, thanks, not one of those ppl (you know who you are) who blocked me for 1 month last time and love to say this and that. 24.228.90.14 (talk) 15:23, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I have reviewed your reference desk questions, and they seem to fit the definition of "trolling-" deliberately offensive questions in which your interest is not learning an answer, but creating drama and entertainment for yourself. You do not appear to need access to the reference desk, because I do not get the impression you are asking questions that you really want answers to- and if you do, the answers to your questions are available to you with a well-structured google search. Your continued participation does not seem likely to make the reference desk a better or more useful resource, either. And I don't see any evidence that you would be useful as a source for reliable answers to questions on the reference desk. I'm not seeing any reason at all that Wikipedia would be better with you participating in it, and I do see evidence that your participation has made Wikipedia worse in the past, so I do not have a good reason for overturning this very reasonable block. FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 16:14, 19 December 2011 (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.

(edit conflict) You beat me to it, but I think we had a particularly disruptive troll in the past who we had to ban for exactly this sort of behavior ... can anyone remember the name? Daniel Case (talk) 16:16, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

omg i am so sorry for my poopy behavior, maybe when i come back in 2 wekes i will comply by the rules andthings of this nature, ok merry christmas, bye.

How about you come back once you learn some basic English? –MuZemike 23:35, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

i will! (in 2 weeks). pls comment on the editor not the editing. oops maybe i have it backward.--24.228.90.14 (talk) 23:37, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 23:35, 19 December 2011 edit MuZemike (talk \| contribs) Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users 71,081 edits For God's sake, learn some English! ← Previous edit		Revision as of 23:37, 19 December 2011 edit undo 24.228.90.14 (talk) →‎Blocked Next edit →
Line 25:		Line 25:

	:How about you come back once you learn some basic English? –[[User talk:MuZemike\|MuZemike]] 23:35, 19 December 2011 (UTC)		:How about you come back once you learn some basic English? –[[User talk:MuZemike\|MuZemike]] 23:35, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

			:::i will! (in 2 weeks). pls comment on the editor not the editing. oops maybe i have it backward.--[[Special:Contributions/24.228.90.14\|24.228.90.14]] ([[User talk:24.228.90.14#top\|talk]]) 23:37, 19 December 2011 (UTC)