Jump to content

User talk:Supersaiyen312

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Supersaiyen312 (talk | contribs) at 00:06, 13 April 2014. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Hello, Supersaiyen312, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

  Introduction
 5    The five pillars of Wikipedia
  How to edit a page
  Help
  Tips
  How to write a great article
  Simplified Manual of Style
  Fun stuff...

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  Abductive (reasoning) 02:50, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Abductive.Supersaiyen312 (talk) 09:18, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback message from Tito Dutta

Hello, Supersaiyen312. You have new messages at Titodutta's talk page.
Message added 01:07, 15 March 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Tito Dutta (contact) 01:07, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Suicide in Greenland

Harrias talk 16:02, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why am I 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).

Supersaiyen312 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Why did I get blocked? All of my contributions have been constructive. If you feel like my account might or could be used abusively, then how about I just give my thoughts on the Talk pages and change things if I have the go ahead/nobody objects to my suggested changes? Even get all the Top administrators to monitor/keep an eye on me. I don't edit Wikipedia much anyway, so it will make it easy for them. If I happen to do anything wrong, even a slight mistake, then you can block me without any notice, but I promise that won't happen. I'll even consult you before I make any changes for even a minor edit. Please trust me. Watch and see. Supersaiyen312 (talk) 02:02, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Checkuser verified sock of blocked User:Sai317. --jpgordon::==( o ) 13:30, 27 March 2013 (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.

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).

Supersaiyen312 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

First off, I forgot my password for Sai317. Therefore, let me explain myself from User talk:Sai317 from here. My block is only for sockpuppetry, but I want to say sorry and apologize for TWO things. First, I want to say sorry and apologize for the sockpuppetry. Second, I want to say sorry for deleting other editors comments (I stopped after the 1st warning). I've changed. PLEASE let my prove myself. Multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not. However, I am afraid of using multiple accounts now whether it "is allowed or not". I am afraid of taking that risk now. Please let me redeem myself, I'm begging you. Supersaiyen312 (talk) 00:40, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Completely unbelievable. See my chronology below. This account was clearly created to evade an indefinite block, and the "I forgot my password" schtick is getting old, given how unbelievable it was last time. Also, using a sockpuppet to make an unblock request for a user indefinitely blocked for making sockpuppets - and only after being caught red-handed - is not going to be successful. Singularity42 (talk) 23:20, 6 September 2013 (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.

Here's a chronology of how we got here:

  • January 27, 2013
  • Sai317 blocked indefinitely for the amount of disruption caused by the user's sockpuppetry. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sai317/Archive
  • Sai317 makes an unblock request claiming the user did not understand the relevant policies and forgot their password: [1]
  • The reviewing admin points out, amongst other things, the contradiction that the editor claimed they forgot their password, but is now able to log in to make the unblock request: [2]
  • Sai317 makes another unblock request: [3]
  • February 3, 2013
  • Second unblock request is denied: [4]
  • February 27, 2013
  • This account is created: [5]
  • March 23, 2013
  • This is account is blocked.

You now claim that this account was created because you forgot your password to the Sai317 account (a claim you have made previously and was shown to be demonstrably untrue). Sorry, but no. Singularity42 (talk) 23:20, 6 September 2013 (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).

Supersaiyen312 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Wait, so now the reason for the decline is for forgetting my password now? I haven't been on the Sai317 account since January 28, 2013. I made the last unblock request September 3, 2013. Meaning I wasn't on Sai317 more than 7 months. Forgetting my password was the reason I was on this account to appeal. Forgetting my password is not a reason for my block. My IP block was for one month. I created this account after my block expired. I thought it was over. I thought the block was done. I thought I could start over. Then the "checkuser" came. I didn't know about what that was. So then I was blocked for 3 more months. After that block was expired, I commented on an administrator's Talk page, and got blocked for 6 more months. I can just serve my block again, but the thing is: I already did... twice. Why do I have to serve a 3rd block? Like I said, I am not on Wikipedia alot. Is there no way to redeem myself? Once I am blocked, I stay blocked for eternity, no excuses? Really? ...OK, please see my chronology below, I will explain myself better. Supersaiyen312 (talk) 10:47, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

As per resolution below. Kuru (talk) 16:00, 30 November 2013 (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.

Here's my chronology of how we got here:

  • January 26, 2013
  • 10:47 Sai317 is created. [6]
  • 10:52 through 12:10 I make 4 edits. Looking back at it now, they were 4 really embarrassing edits.
  • 12:15 Sai317 gets warned for deleting other editor's comments. [7]
  • 12:18 through 14:38 I make 11 more edits. [8]
  • January 27, 2013
  • 00:54 through 07:23 I make 31 more edits. [9] [10]
  • between 07:23 and 09:19 I log off, take a break and forget my password. I decide to IP edit instead. [11] [12]
  • 09:19 through 14:42 I make 11 edits IP editing and stop to take a break. [[13]]
  • 14:44 Gets general note for deleting talk page comments. [14] I swear that I did not see this one.
  • 15:23 Back from break 40 minutes later. Try to recover password, but not sure if I associated an email with the account. I decide to create a new account instead. [15]
  • 15:27 through 16:38 User:Zebusadams makes 8 edits. Receives a general note and final warning for deleting editors comments. [[16]] [17]

(already stopped deleting editors' comments after the final warning)

  • Somewhere between 17:21 [18] [[19]] through 17:32 [20] [21] I try to recover Sai317's password with the password recovery system. Figured out my email.

(this was before I was blocked. After getting blocked, I can not use the password recovery system at all.)

  • February 3, 2013
  • Danger denies second unblock request: [27]
  • I decide to serve my block.
  • February 27, 2013
  • My 1 month block is served. This account is created. [28] I assume that I could start over.
  • March 24, 2013
  • This account is blocked. [29] I wonder what I did wrong. No warnings this time. I thought it was a new start. I start looking up more information about "checkuser" --- had no idea what it was.
  • March 27, 2013
  • I make an unblock request on this account. [30]
  • Jpgordon declines without any specific reasons to my request other than "Checkuser verified sock of blocked User:Sai317." [31]
  • I decide to serve my 2nd block.
  • September 2, 2013
  • My 3 month block was expired by this point. I leave an IP comment on NawlinWiki's talk page (who happens to be an administrator). [32]
  • NawlinWiki blocks my IP address. [33]
  • September 3, 2013
  • I come back here to make another unblock request. [34]
  • September 6, 2013
  • You (Singularity42) deny the request. [35]

I see the denied request about a week later or so but didn't read it. (too busy, homework, and other stuff to do)

  • November 25, 2013
  • I make this unblock request.

At least the request was taken a little more seriously this time. Unlike the last time. [36] Like I said, I have no reason to use multiple accounts anymore. No reason at all. It's over. I won't do it anymore, I promise. Supersaiyen312 (talk) 10:47, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

:The duration on the block of your IP has absolutely no correlation to your block length. The only reason for set block lengths on IPs is that IPs have a tendency to change as most of them are dynamic. Since your main account is blocked indefinitely, that is your block length. In other words, there is no set block length for you. Until you can get an unblock your main account, you may not edit. As long as the block on your main account is in place, any and all IPs or accounts you use/create will continue to be blocked. Please also note that admins may not unblock this account as this account is a CheckUser block. Your only methods of getting unblock is taking the standard offer which requires at 6 months of no editing and then asking a CheckUser to be unblocked or as mentioned above, contacting the Ban Appeals Subcommittee. Elockid (Talk) 14:18, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The thing is, I haven't been on my Sai317 account for more than 9 months at this point (1/28/13 now 11/26/13). I can try to use the password recovery function, but it doesn't work (because I'm blocked). Why can't this be my main account now? Keep in mind, my IP address is also blocked with (cannot edit own talk page).[37] The reason I am able to edit my talk page is because I contacted an administrator on freenode IRC [38] and explained my situation. The admin agreed to give me talk page access on this account.

About the standard offer, it's been more than 9 months since this whole thing started. I promise that I've changed. Please give me a chance to prove myself. Supersaiyen312 (talk) 01:52, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You reverted an IP user in September. I haven't done any digging so assuming that that's the latest edit you've made outside of your talk page, then you should request an unblock sometime during April. If you wish, this can be your main account. However, your sanctions from your first account will carry over. I am willing to show leniency and I will consider unblocking this account provided that two conditions are met. The first is that you do not evade your block until April. Even if it's April and you evade your block or create a new account, that will jeopardize your chances of getting unblocked. So please email me first. The second condition is that you convince the original unblocking admin, Basalisk (talk · contribs) to unblock you. Elockid (Talk) 04:36, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I will email you in April. But how do I get a hold of Basalisk? Supersaiyen312 (talk) 23:14, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Click on this link: Special:EmailUser/Basalisk. Elockid (Talk) 02:56, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
To be frank I'm sceptical about the benefit of an unblock, but whatever. Since the primary account would be a pain to recover I guess it's worth giving you the benefit of the doubt with an unblock. Condition: please visibly link your account to Sai317 on your user page so people can follow this. Elockid, would you do the honours with the unblock? There's something rooted in my soul that won't permit me to lift a checkuser block. Basalisk inspect damage⁄berate 19:32, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Basalisk! Thank you. I won't let you down, I promise. Yes, I will clearly link my account to Sai317 also. Supersaiyen312 (talk) 05:45, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK, so it looks like it was refused. Keep in mind, Elockid said this can be my MAIN account now... But anyway, Elockid, I emailed you. My IP address is technically unblocked now, however, I'm trying to make sure I don't get blocked for a 4th time for no reason. So... is it time now? It's been 6 months now, so the standard offer technically takes effect now. Are my sanctions gone? Can I start over? Supersaiyen312 (talk) 05:28, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, since Elockid hasn't been on for more than a month now, I will also email Basalisk too. And possibly even NawlinWiki, Singularity42 or BASC, just in case.

22:12, 9 March 2014‎

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).

Supersaiyen312 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I just want to notify that my IP address is unblocked now. So about this account: You do NOT have to unblock me. I just want to get permission that I won't be blocked if I start editing again. At least for a limited time. I've learned my lesson. I have to say again, let me prove it. Supersaiyen312 (talk) 22:12, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

First of all, please don't use the unblock template for purposes other than unblock requests. Secondly, no, you absolutely cannot and will not be given "permission that [you] won't be blocked if [you] start editing again." I really don't know how you can have failed to take this point on board, after all the explanations you have been given, but if you are found to have been editing, either from another account or from an IP address without logging in, that account or IP address will be blocked, and the standard offer will at best be reset to run again for six months, and quite possibly withdrawn. Unless and until your account is unblocked, you do not have permission to edit Wikipedia, whether the IP address you are using is blocked or not. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 14:29, 10 March 2014 (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.


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).

Supersaiyen312 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I meant that I wanted to START OVER. I have NOT edited at all, EVEN AFTER THE BLOCK EXPIRED. So you're saying I can be re-blocked, with the standard offer reset, SIMPLY BECAUSE I'M STILL HERE? And I didn't simply say "not", I said "not have to", since it was your choice. I was not "expecting" anything, I was simply asking for permission. This is messed up. The reason I made the unblock request was because no one was answering me. Elockid has been gone for more than a month. Singularity42 has been gone for more than 4 months. It looks like Basalisk is simply ignoring me, and I have not emailed Nawlinwiki yet, simply because I'm afraid to, but I'm thinking about emailing him/her now. OK, if you're going to deny this request too, can we just reset everything to how it was on March 3, 2014? I'd rather have Elockid or Basalisk handle this. This is ridiculous. It's been more than a year now since this whole thing started. I'VE LEARNED MY LESSON, I'm not evading anything, I EVEN NOTIFIED that my block expired this time, which I now realize was a mistake. And that last edit with my IP was my bad, I thought I was still logged in, plus it was MY own talk page. To explain more, I was not expecting to get unblocked, because it's been pretty much a year, and no one wants to unblock me, that's WHY I said "you don't have to". I was trying to look for some mercy. Supersaiyen312 (talk) 17:50, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Per user request - cleanup SQLQuery me! 04:27, 14 March 2014 (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.

What part of "you should request an unblock sometime during April" is difficult to understand? And have you forgotten the message above where you wrote "I will email you in April"? The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 07:34, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
OK, fine. I will. Now can we just please revert everything on this page back to the way it was on March 3rd, 2014? Supersaiyen312 (talk) 07:46, 11 March 2014 (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).

Supersaiyen312 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Ok, so what do I have to do? It's been more than 6 months at this point. Maybe more than a year depending on how you look at it. No one that I've emailed is answering me so far. The last reason for my decline this time is "Per user request - cleanup". I don't know what you mean by that and that's not a good enough reason for me. Supersaiyen312 (talk) 9:49 am, Yesterday (UTC−5)

Decline reason:

I believe that is because you agreed to request an unblock some time during April ("Okay, fine, I will," above). Thus, the unblock request in effect was declined since you'll be making another one later. By the way, regarding your request for reversion: Generally, while an unblock is still in effect, prior unblock requests are procedurally left on the page, so that reviewing administrators can easily review the prior requests. If you want to remove other content besides the unblock requests, you can do so, although it might be for the best to leave stuff intact for now so that everything's clearly visible on the table, so to speak. (I'm procedurally declining this unblock request as it is a request for information, not a request to be unblocked, per se) - Vianello (Talk) 23:23, 15 March 2014 (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.

OK, so I guess the only way is to wait until April. Or wait until Elockid or Basalisk answers. Supersaiyen312 (talk) 22:42, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Supersaiyen312 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

OK, so it's April now, so is it time? Looks like everone is ignoring me still. Now OK, the last reason for my decline was because it was apparently a "request for information". Well, how about my previous unblock requests? It was actually technically a continuation of my previous unblock requests. Now then agian, Elockid told me to email him when it's April, which I haven't gotten to yet, but I'm about to now. Supersaiyen312 (talk) 01:04, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Accept reason:

I've given you another chance. Please note that creating new accounts that do not adhere with the sockpuppetry policy will result in your editing privileges being revoked again. Elockid (Talk) 02:42, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've found a couple of accounts that are technically  Confirmed to be a match to you. Though they haven't edited, I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt. How do you intend to contribute to the project constructively? Elockid (Talk) 03:29, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Not only have they not edited, they were created on other Wikipedias, not the English one. Suptherebro about 2 months ago on zu.wiki, and Алексейсмирный about 3 months ago on ru.wiki. As you know, when you create an account on one wiki, it "automatically" creates it on other wikis as long as you visit it, which I do not think is fair. I accidentally went on the English wiki while on those accounts: Suptherebro on March 3rd, which was the same day my IP got unblocked. And Алексейсмирный on March 8th, which was the day before I made my new unblock request up there. So pretty recent. And accidentally. To be fair, I visited a lot of other wikis too, not only the English one, and didn't edit them, and not planning too. For example, you also visited a lot of other wikis too (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:CentralAuth/Elockid) but you didn't edit the majority of them either. That's how this is. Now read Tito Dutta's comment up there at 03:52, 27 March 2013 where he agreed that I was making constructive edits. And I am willing to keep in touch with you to prove myself. Supersaiyen312 (talk) 09:17, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That's why I did say I am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. I simply asked, what do you intend to contribute to this project? An example would be, I want to work on article X using reliable sources such as these. I didn't ask anything about those accounts. Elockid (Talk) 13:30, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Not much really, just a few fixes. For example, Hudson Middle School is not a "private school", which was added here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hudson_Middle_School&diff=426483956&oldid=367554373 along with other things that were never reverted. Although some of them might need updating by now. But you can also see my edits for yourself too, I won't let you down and I won't mess anthing up. Supersaiyen312 (talk) 23:23, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Unblocked. See above. Elockid (Talk) 02:42, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I've sent you another email. Supersaiyen312 (talk) 23:37, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Supersaiyen312&oldid=603945990"