User talk:CuriousWikian590

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) 12:49, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

List of Tinga Tinga Tales episodes

Hi.

You just made a live article, "List of Tinga Tinga Tales episodes" - however, it was not ready to become a live page, and may have been deleted - so I have moved it to User:CuriousWikian590/List of Tinga Tinga Tales episodes.

You can develop it there, and there are instructions at the top on how to get it reviewed.

Please read WP:FIRST. Thanks. Chzz ► 13:14, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Sword in the Stone

Greetings. I wanted to let you know that your recent page move at The Sword in the Stone (film) has been undone. I believe you were acting to improve the article, however previous consensus on film articles states that the only reason for the year to be appended to the article name is if there is one (or more) other notable films using the exact same title. A good example would be Footloose (1984 film) and Footloose (2011 film). If you still believe that this move is necessary, please discuss it on the article's talk page and obtain consensus before moving it again. --McDoob AU 93 16:16, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, CuriousWikian590. You have new messages at McDoobAU93's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

16:04, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Mr Percival

I've replied to your proposal at Template talk:Thomas.

Mr. Percival is already covered in the list of T&F characters. I also discovered Mr Percival (the pelican) -- as did you, I suspect -- and I have added a hatnote on that page for anyone else becoming similarly lost! -- EdJogg (talk) 13:39, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

November 2011

Constructive contributions are appreciated and strongly encouraged, but your recent edit to the userpage of another user may be considered vandalism. Specifically, your edit to User:Brainiac Adam may be offensive or unwelcome. In general, it is considered polite to avoid substantially editing others' userpages without their permission. Instead, please bring the matter to their talk page and let them edit their user page themselves if they agree on a need to do so. Please refer to Wikipedia:User page for more information on User page etiquette. Thank you. v/r - T P 16:28, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. I found his blue eyes being h=green and wanted to correct it. CuriousWikian590 (talk) 23:27, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive behaviour. Your behaviour is verging on harassment. Wikipedia prides itself on providing a safe environment for its collaborators, and harassing edits potentially compromise that safe environment. If you continue behaving like this, you may be blocked from editing. Daniel Case (talk) 19:17, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What are you Talking about? CuriousWikian590 (talk) 23:21, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for block evasion, and also disruptive editing, including harassment of another editor and talk page vandalism. 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.

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).

CuriousWikian590 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I'm no Sockpuppet. I never even spoke to JamesBWatson. How did he find out? I'll do another account soon as possible. Just you wait. I am very sorry. Please unblock me.

Decline reason:

Seriously? In the same request you're claiming innocence, asking how you got caught out, threatening to do it again and apologising? Jac16888 ^Talk 00:10, 27 November 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.

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).

CuriousWikian590 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Please Unblock me. I want JamesBWatson to explain how he thinks I am a Sockpuppet. Brainiac Adam has two accounts so why do you say that's not allowed?

Decline reason:

One unblock request at a time, please. Also WP:NOTTHEM. And, you might have noticed, if you looked, that the other user you mention closed his old account when he created a new name. That is acceptable. Multiple accounts at once is sockpuppeting. And... The Bushranger _{One ping only} 00:48, 27 November 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.

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).

CuriousWikian590 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Now he's deleted my Tinga Tinga Tales episodes. I worked so hard on that to be made into it's own article. Just because you block someone does not mean you can revert all their edits. Please unblock me and give me another chance.

Decline reason:

...so is block evasion. Also, as noted, WP:NOTTHEM. Given your comments above, including a promise to sock further, and the fact that behavioral evidence indicates you are a returning indefinitly blocked user (which, by the way, means contributions can be speedily deleted), an unblock is not indicated here. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 00:48, 27 November 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.

Now all you need to do is press unblock. Please let me edit again. I won't do any of this ever again.

I Understand Now

I will read from the thingy.

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).

CuriousWikian590 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

1. I am Very sorry for the Disruption with Brainiac Adam. He has two accounts (Prankman Hifly), 2. I have more stuff to do here with an account, 3. Why do you think I am another User, 4. I promise to be more reasonable to others. I never vandalised a user page. Please restore my work on Tinga Tinga Tales and my other work. I worked so hard on it, 5. Now I have read the thingy, this should be accepted.

Decline reason:

The WP:DUCK is obvious. Rather than focus on the problem (as per the guide to appealing blocks, the editor is instead trying to deflect. In order to protect the project, indefinite blocks are applies in cases of WP:SOCK. In order to get the block released, return to your original account and request unblock there, and abandon all other accounts forever. I will advise, however, editors who sock and attempt to deny it - or continually ask for prof when it's plainly obvious - are typically advised to leave the project for a minimum of 6 months. As per WP:BLOCK, it is you, the person who are blocked - editing using another account, or even anonymously is never permitted in that case. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:00, 27 November 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.

The fact he has two accounts is utterly irrelevant here. He had a past account, he stopped using it when he created a new account. That is acceptable. There is behavoriable evidence that your account is the same as User:Mr. Curious Man, who is indefinitly blocked, and therefore would be block evasion and unacceptable. I will leave this for another admin to handle, but I will say that the behaviorable similarities between this account and User:Mr. Curious Man are concerning. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 01:55, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I may have as well. I was going to do other stuff as well. I followed the steps of unblock requesting and still unaccepted. Explain why you think I am that user. CuriousWikian590 (talk)

User:JamesBWatson would have the final say on that, but a combination of username similarity and spheres of editing interest indicate a concerning correlation. In addition, "I may have as well" I assume means "quit one account, then started a replacement" - which is all well and good, except you apparently missed the part where the presumed previous account was, and is, indefinitly blocked. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 02:17, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Now why was I blamed as a Sockpuppet? How did JBW know? He deleted my Tinga Tinga Tales episode work and I worked so hard on that. He didn't delete the articles Mr. Curious Man made. I have more stuff to do. I follwed the steps on the thingy on doing an unblock and I am not unblocked. I'm not spending the rest of my life with no account.

Adios

I'm signing out and my one day make another account and prevent anyone from knowing. I want JamesBWatson to explain how he found out. CuriousWikian590 (talk) 12:53, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

One of the constant themes of your editing, whether anonymously via the various IP addresses you have used (22 of them that I know of) or via the accounts you have used, is that you seem to think other Wikipedians are stupid. You make the most ridiculous attempts at deception that wouldn't fool anyone but a child or an idiot, and you give yourself away in the most blatantly obvious ways. And now you think I am stupid enough to tell you how I can tell, so that you can avoid the same mistakes again.

There is no need at all to make another sockpuppet account and try to hide the fact. All you have to do is the following. Go back to your first account, explain there what you did wrong (no more nonsense such as "I didn't do it, and by the way how did you know I did it?" but just straightforward honest admission of what you did. Explain how your editing will be different from now on from how it has been in the past. Promise not to use more sockpuppet accounts. Request an unblock. If you can do this in a way that gives the impression that you mean it then you can be unblocked once and for all, and you won't need to keep on trying to hide what you are doing, or suffering the frustration of being blocked over and over again. However, a couple of good ways to make sure that won't happen are threatening to use more sockpuppets and making absurd claims like "I never vandalised a user page" when anyone at all can check your editing history and see what you did to User:Brainiac Adam . Think about it, and perhaps you will decide to come clean. Contrary to what you seem to think, nobody prefers having you blocked to having you unblocked and editing honestly and constructively. JamesBWatson (talk) 19:42, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]