User talk:Zombiedude101
![]() | This user is banned from editing the English Wikipedia. Administrators, please review the banning policy before unblocking. (block log · contributions) |
collapsing numerous unblock requests, unblock discussions, UTRS notices, and discourse.-- Deepfriedokra 02:24, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
|
---|
![]() {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} , but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. BencherliteTalk 20:33, 5 February 2013 (UTC)![]() Zombiedude101 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log)) Request reason: I'll admit that I make some trolly edits when I'm in that kind of mood, but they always get undone so no harm done. But I do make constructive contributions sometimes. Like with the Melissa Hutchison page. Please? I'm sorry, alright. Decline reason: That's not exactly assurance that the behavior won't recur. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 21:02, 5 February 2013 (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.
![]() Zombiedude101 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log)) Request reason: I'm sorry, it was stupid of me. And just to note I wasn't the one who added 'Negro', that was someone else, I just added the German flag. You said Melissa Hutchison was unsourced, but you're wrong. It has one source, and it's p damn obvious she exists anyhow. I'll admit that I have made edits/contributions which I shouldn't, but it's never been done with malice so much as a joke. I've made a good few contributions, however small, and if given the opportunity I can prove that I can make further contributions. Decline reason: I think you've shown us the type of edits we can expect. You've ignored many warnings and made racist/anti-Semitic edits. I don't see any reason to think you can control you "jokes". Kuru (talk) 21:56, 5 February 2013 (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. ![]() Zombiedude101 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log)) Request reason: What happened previously was in the past, very much so into the past - I don't have any intent of stirring shite up here and want to make some constructive edits. It's a non-issue as, admittedly, I have another two accounts which I have periodically used over the years to make edits where needed, but I feel that for the sake of principle and setting affairs in order I would get this smear removed. I apologise. Decline reason: Your honesty is appreciated, but requesting an unblock whilst admitting to violating one of Wikipedia's core policies to evade that block... just.. no. Yunshui 雲水 09:29, 13 February 2018 (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. ![]() Zombiedude101 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log)) Request reason: So that's it - 'no sell'? I just made a fairly honest point and admitted I used to be a shite, that I want to make things right. I haven't really been evading the block - I've had new machines, addresses, moved around etc over the years so it wasn't as if I went out of my way to circumvent anything - I merely made a point that I'm doing this on principle because it seems like the right thing to do. I apologise - and as I said before I'll not be causing further grief, I want to do something decent with this account. I even take responsibility for the people who 'borrowed' (I say this with air quotes because they never actually asked my consent) my account to plaster the more anti-semitic/REICHLAND type content that cropped up. What is there to lose? If I make a point of being a problem you can easily smash me down. Decline reason: So in addition to openly admitting to evading your block with multiple accounts, you now admit this account was compromised. There is not a chance this account will be unblocked at this time. I'm removing talk page access, you may request an unblock at WP:UTRS in the future. RickinBaltimore (talk) 13:00, 13 February 2018 (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.
![]() Zombiedude101 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log)) UTRS appeal #20671 was submitted on Feb 19, 2018 11:40:58. This review is now closed.
--UTRSBot (talk) 11:40, 19 February 2018 (UTC) ![]() Zombiedude101 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log)) UTRS appeal #20719 was submitted on Feb 23, 2018 09:55:06. This review is now closed.
--UTRSBot (talk) 09:55, 23 February 2018 (UTC) ![]() Zombiedude101 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log)) UTRS appeal #26079 was submitted on Jul 25, 2019 12:29:02. This review is now closed.
--UTRSBot (talk) 12:29, 25 July 2019 (UTC) ![]() Zombiedude101 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log)) UTRS appeal #26082 was submitted on Jul 25, 2019 15:33:01. This review is now closed.
--UTRSBot (talk) 15:33, 25 July 2019 (UTC) Utrs, talk page access
![]() Zombiedude101 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log)) UTRS appeal #28741 was submitted on 2020-01-29 08:07:24. This review is now closed.
. I have restored talk page access so user may request unblock here.-- Deepfriedokra 10:58, 29 January 2020 (UTC). Well that's intriguing-- TPA wa not removed on this account. Well, we will see.-- Deepfriedokra 11:01, 29 January 2020 (UTC) Unblock discussion
![]() Zombiedude101 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log)) Request reason: The original reason for my block was vandalism, far back in 2013. As you can imagine, seven years is a long time and plenty enough for someone to come back with a change of heart. YES, I have been on WP between then and now making a few contributions. I don't recall what accounts these were all made on as it was a long time ago and I've had other things on my mind to be quite honest. I am not here to commit vandalism, I am here to contribute. I'll discuss above, preferably as the unblock template doesn't let you format properly, just makes a massive wall of text. Decline reason: Per below. This doesn't even come close to addressing the numerous issues with your past conduct, including recent block evasion. Huon (talk) 23:43, 9 February 2020 (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. Not eligible for unblockI very strongly oppose unblocking this user. They've made a death threat against a sitting U.S. senator, see User talk:Zombiedude101z. They've engaged in block evasion in September, 2019 (at least), and are well aware WP:SO requires at least six months with zero edits. I suggest they are deliberately choosing not to address the many other problems raised over there. And finally, NinjaRobotPirate noted they are banned by the community; see here. No administrator is free to unilaterally lift a community ban, and they are not free to appeal for at least one year since their last edit. That would have been September 2020; if this current request fails, that will be February 2021. And to appeal, they must follow WP:UNBAN, so their appeal can be discussed by the community. --Yamla (talk) 11:23, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
|
I have protected this page from all except admin edits for the next year. You are next eligible to request your ban be lifted on 2021-02-09. WP:UNBAN explains how to make this request. --Yamla (talk) 00:07, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
UTRS
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/66/Orologio_blu.svg/48px-Orologio_blu.svg.png)
Zombiedude101 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
UTRS appeal #29010 was submitted on 2020-02-17 01:26:35. This review is now closed.
Plus UTRS appeal #39916, UTRS appeal #39701, & UTRS appeal #40020. WP:IDHT much? Cabayi (talk) 12:37, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
- And UTRS appeal #40022. --Yamla (talk) 13:37, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
- And UTRS appeal #40024 and UTRS appeal #40038. --Yamla (talk) 02:27, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
- Just to be clear - I made these appeals to get answers to certain questions since half of them were closed before I got the answer I wanted - ie, why WAS the 'clock' reset because of my earlier appeals? That seems fairly unreasonable, to be honest. I'll make a more comprehensive unblock appeal later, it's midnight here and I've got other business to attend to. Zombiedude101 (talk) 00:31, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
- And UTRS appeal #40024 and UTRS appeal #40038. --Yamla (talk) 02:27, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f6/Appointment_blue.svg/48px-Appointment_blue.svg.png)
Zombiedude101 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
To be clear, I am not trying to shift blame, I am simply trying to explain that the actions/attitude of others didn't mesh well with me at the time and the way certain things were done (such as how appeals would be locked, preventing me from responding to certain comments, or points that I raised being ignored rather than getting addressed) - that left me frustrated and inclined to push back. And, since it's a consistently recurring point put to me - I didn't make any death threats. That certainly wasn't me. So when I make comments like "I feel like every other point I raised was ignored with WP admins just pointing blindly at legislation and not using their heads to understand the context of the situation" I feel like this never gets addressed fully, like being treated like a bad faith editor when I was trying to show I was only interested in being useful. As an example of a good faith edit that was treated as bad faith - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neall_Ellis - this was recently restored for me and I don't see what's wrong with the content here. And ultimately - what harm is there in allowing me to return to making edits? One misstep and it's a few mouse clicks (or screen taps) to revert and block me.
I also question why I had to wait until now to appeal. I didn't commit further block evasion in 2020, to what I recall. At least nothing to warrant waiting another year, I know that! Think it was a misunderstanding. The only thing I actually recall doing was reaching out to Yamla to talk to them about my ban, which should not have reset the clock.
To cut a long story short - let's start on a clean slate. I've come across the wrong way (and some have misunderstood my intent) and should've been less hostile to people over how certain things were done. I do intend to clean up a few things, ie game affiliated articles, emulation, Wildbow's Web Serial Ward etc. Edits such as those made on my 'sock' accounts that were rolled back on the basis they were sockedits, since they were intended as constructive - not disruptive.Notes:
- In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
- Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.
If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:
{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=TL;DR I was blocked a long time ago for acts of vandalism. I accept that, I was a little shit in school. All's fair. HOWEVER, when I came back 5 years later to get my account unblocked I admitted that in the years in between I'd made edits on various IPs and alt accounts, which automatically got my appeal denied. I got angry and, frustrated, began making alt accounts (socking) so I could make constructive edits whether or not WP wanted me to. Which eventually led to the issue below: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Zombiedude101z#Let's_talk I feel my point above illustrates the grievances I have, to be honest. The only reason I'm blocked and banned is because I refused to go through the channels and get unbanned and decided to keep socking with constructive edits. So I've given it time, I've waited a year if not longer and I'm taking one more shot at coming in via the appropriate channels. I'm here to be civil, I have no intent of causing trouble. So you can let me return to making constructive edits as I had with Neall Ellis, Worm, etc and we can end this dispute. My attitude hasn't always been great and part of that was because I felt (and, to an extent, still feel) I was ignored and dismissed as a vandal without looking at the context of my situation. I got angry ans frustrated that legitimate edits I made were reverted solely on the basis I was 'socking'. To be clear, I am not trying to shift blame, I am simply trying to explain that the actions/attitude of others didn't mesh well with me at the time and the way certain things were done (such as how appeals would be locked, preventing me from responding to certain comments, or points that I raised being ignored rather than getting addressed) - that left me frustrated and inclined to push back. And, since it's a consistently recurring point put to me - I didn't make any death threats. That certainly wasn't me. So when I make comments like "I feel like every other point I raised was ignored with WP admins just pointing blindly at legislation and not using their heads to understand the context of the situation" I feel like this never gets addressed fully, like being treated like a bad faith editor when I was trying to show I was only interested in being useful. As an example of a good faith edit that was treated as bad faith - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neall_Ellis - this was recently restored for me and I don't see what's wrong with the content here. And ultimately - what harm is there in allowing me to return to making edits? One misstep and it's a few mouse clicks (or screen taps) to revert and block me. I also question why I had to wait until now to appeal. I didn't commit further block evasion in 2020, to what I recall. At least nothing to warrant waiting another year, I know that! Think it was a misunderstanding. The only thing I actually recall doing was reaching out to Yamla to talk to them about my ban, which should not have reset the clock. To cut a long story short - let's start on a clean slate. I've come across the wrong way (and some have misunderstood my intent) and should've been less hostile to people over how certain things were done. I do intend to clean up a few things, ie game affiliated articles, emulation, Wildbow's Web Serial Ward etc. Edits such as those made on my 'sock' accounts that were rolled back on the basis they were sockedits, since they were intended as constructive - not disruptive. |3 = ~~~~}}
If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}}
with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.
{{unblock reviewed |1=TL;DR I was blocked a long time ago for acts of vandalism. I accept that, I was a little shit in school. All's fair. HOWEVER, when I came back 5 years later to get my account unblocked I admitted that in the years in between I'd made edits on various IPs and alt accounts, which automatically got my appeal denied. I got angry and, frustrated, began making alt accounts (socking) so I could make constructive edits whether or not WP wanted me to. Which eventually led to the issue below: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Zombiedude101z#Let's_talk I feel my point above illustrates the grievances I have, to be honest. The only reason I'm blocked and banned is because I refused to go through the channels and get unbanned and decided to keep socking with constructive edits. So I've given it time, I've waited a year if not longer and I'm taking one more shot at coming in via the appropriate channels. I'm here to be civil, I have no intent of causing trouble. So you can let me return to making constructive edits as I had with Neall Ellis, Worm, etc and we can end this dispute. My attitude hasn't always been great and part of that was because I felt (and, to an extent, still feel) I was ignored and dismissed as a vandal without looking at the context of my situation. I got angry ans frustrated that legitimate edits I made were reverted solely on the basis I was 'socking'. To be clear, I am not trying to shift blame, I am simply trying to explain that the actions/attitude of others didn't mesh well with me at the time and the way certain things were done (such as how appeals would be locked, preventing me from responding to certain comments, or points that I raised being ignored rather than getting addressed) - that left me frustrated and inclined to push back. And, since it's a consistently recurring point put to me - I didn't make any death threats. That certainly wasn't me. So when I make comments like "I feel like every other point I raised was ignored with WP admins just pointing blindly at legislation and not using their heads to understand the context of the situation" I feel like this never gets addressed fully, like being treated like a bad faith editor when I was trying to show I was only interested in being useful. As an example of a good faith edit that was treated as bad faith - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neall_Ellis - this was recently restored for me and I don't see what's wrong with the content here. And ultimately - what harm is there in allowing me to return to making edits? One misstep and it's a few mouse clicks (or screen taps) to revert and block me. I also question why I had to wait until now to appeal. I didn't commit further block evasion in 2020, to what I recall. At least nothing to warrant waiting another year, I know that! Think it was a misunderstanding. The only thing I actually recall doing was reaching out to Yamla to talk to them about my ban, which should not have reset the clock. To cut a long story short - let's start on a clean slate. I've come across the wrong way (and some have misunderstood my intent) and should've been less hostile to people over how certain things were done. I do intend to clean up a few things, ie game affiliated articles, emulation, Wildbow's Web Serial Ward etc. Edits such as those made on my 'sock' accounts that were rolled back on the basis they were sockedits, since they were intended as constructive - not disruptive. |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}
If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here
with your rationale:
{{unblock reviewed |1=TL;DR I was blocked a long time ago for acts of vandalism. I accept that, I was a little shit in school. All's fair. HOWEVER, when I came back 5 years later to get my account unblocked I admitted that in the years in between I'd made edits on various IPs and alt accounts, which automatically got my appeal denied. I got angry and, frustrated, began making alt accounts (socking) so I could make constructive edits whether or not WP wanted me to. Which eventually led to the issue below: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Zombiedude101z#Let's_talk I feel my point above illustrates the grievances I have, to be honest. The only reason I'm blocked and banned is because I refused to go through the channels and get unbanned and decided to keep socking with constructive edits. So I've given it time, I've waited a year if not longer and I'm taking one more shot at coming in via the appropriate channels. I'm here to be civil, I have no intent of causing trouble. So you can let me return to making constructive edits as I had with Neall Ellis, Worm, etc and we can end this dispute. My attitude hasn't always been great and part of that was because I felt (and, to an extent, still feel) I was ignored and dismissed as a vandal without looking at the context of my situation. I got angry ans frustrated that legitimate edits I made were reverted solely on the basis I was 'socking'. To be clear, I am not trying to shift blame, I am simply trying to explain that the actions/attitude of others didn't mesh well with me at the time and the way certain things were done (such as how appeals would be locked, preventing me from responding to certain comments, or points that I raised being ignored rather than getting addressed) - that left me frustrated and inclined to push back. And, since it's a consistently recurring point put to me - I didn't make any death threats. That certainly wasn't me. So when I make comments like "I feel like every other point I raised was ignored with WP admins just pointing blindly at legislation and not using their heads to understand the context of the situation" I feel like this never gets addressed fully, like being treated like a bad faith editor when I was trying to show I was only interested in being useful. As an example of a good faith edit that was treated as bad faith - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neall_Ellis - this was recently restored for me and I don't see what's wrong with the content here. And ultimately - what harm is there in allowing me to return to making edits? One misstep and it's a few mouse clicks (or screen taps) to revert and block me. I also question why I had to wait until now to appeal. I didn't commit further block evasion in 2020, to what I recall. At least nothing to warrant waiting another year, I know that! Think it was a misunderstanding. The only thing I actually recall doing was reaching out to Yamla to talk to them about my ban, which should not have reset the clock. To cut a long story short - let's start on a clean slate. I've come across the wrong way (and some have misunderstood my intent) and should've been less hostile to people over how certain things were done. I do intend to clean up a few things, ie game affiliated articles, emulation, Wildbow's Web Serial Ward etc. Edits such as those made on my 'sock' accounts that were rolled back on the basis they were sockedits, since they were intended as constructive - not disruptive. |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}
Remember, you are banned, not blocked. No admin is permitted to unilaterally lift your block. Is this the request you wish carried over to the noticeboard for discussion? --Yamla (talk) 13:17, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
- Yes - why'd you advocate for my banning though? I thought we had an agreement - I hold off on the edits. But then you went and asked the community to ban me. Furthermore, will I get a chance to speak my piece? It irritates me when someone has a point against me but doesn't offer me the opportunity to speak for myself, yknow. Zombiedude101 (talk) 13:26, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
- Throwing in another comment since I've seen you oppose my unblock - please allow me to speak for myself on the noticeboard, or give me the option to provide input. The MULTIPLE UTRS appeals I made were to get questions answered - ie, why was the clock reset when I had only reached out to get questions addressed? I only kept remaking them because they were closed and locked before I got the information I had asked for. Why was the appeal window pushed from 2020 to Feb 2021? Etc. I have nothing to do with racism or death threats, I assure you. And as I said - any single mis-step would allow me to be immediately rebanned. That I am here, appealing my ban, rather than making another sockpuppet and changing my IP - surely that's a show of good faith that I am trying to work with the process and do it properly? Zombiedude101 (talk) 14:32, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
- You have the ability to leave comments here and request they be copied over to WP:AN. Evading your block was not a sensible decision, today. I'm sticking to one venue going forward; WP:AN, so won't be responding to any points here. --Yamla (talk) 14:54, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
- But surely it isn't such a crime to 'sock' my own appeal, if I am being honest and openly stating my intent? What's the problem there? If I was here in bad faith I wouldn't have bothered making an appeal, I would have simply just made a sock, changed my IP and started over. Instead, I am here and TRYING to work with you. Zombiedude101 (talk) 15:10, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
- You have the ability to leave comments here and request they be copied over to WP:AN. Evading your block was not a sensible decision, today. I'm sticking to one venue going forward; WP:AN, so won't be responding to any points here. --Yamla (talk) 14:54, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
- Throwing in another comment since I've seen you oppose my unblock - please allow me to speak for myself on the noticeboard, or give me the option to provide input. The MULTIPLE UTRS appeals I made were to get questions answered - ie, why was the clock reset when I had only reached out to get questions addressed? I only kept remaking them because they were closed and locked before I got the information I had asked for. Why was the appeal window pushed from 2020 to Feb 2021? Etc. I have nothing to do with racism or death threats, I assure you. And as I said - any single mis-step would allow me to be immediately rebanned. That I am here, appealing my ban, rather than making another sockpuppet and changing my IP - surely that's a show of good faith that I am trying to work with the process and do it properly? Zombiedude101 (talk) 14:32, 10 February 2021 (UTC)