User talk:Funkatastic

-- zzuuzz ^(talk) has given you a large glass of milk, for assisting with a very messy article. Milk somehow promotes WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a glass of milk, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or someone putting up with some stick at this time. Enjoy!

Spread the lovely, cool, refreshing goodness of milk by adding {{subst:Glass of milk}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

A cup of tea for you!

With this ever dramatic world and WikiDrama, here's a cup of tea to alleviate your day!

This e-tea's remains have been e-composted SwisterTwister talk 05:59, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Admitting defeat

I guess you've been right all along. I might have opened a can of worms that I shouldn't have opened in the first place. I'm ready to talk about a compromise.--Keith Okamoto (talk) 22:49, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry if I came across rude. When I asked you about what you did, I was wondering, asked and told you about our consensus. If I was rude, then I apologize.--Keith Okamoto (talk) 23:27, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Block, topic ban extended

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 3 days for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Since you chose to ignore your topic ban (AN/I TP) by making this edit, I have blocked your account for a period of 3 days, and extended the topic ban duration by 3 months. The topic ban will now expire on 4 June 2016. I hope you will take this more seriously now, as block durations tend to escalate rather quickly for repeated topic ban violations. ~Awilley (talk) 22:14, 25 February 2016 (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).

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

Request reason:

Nobody told me about the ban when I made the damn edit, just continued mod abuse. Funkatastic (talk) 08:08, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You were informed of the topic ban on Feb. 4 by Awilley. You called it ridiculous on Feb. 12 after being reminded of it a second time. You were clearly informed of the topic ban. only (talk) 11:20, 26 February 2016 (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.

only You literally just referenced the conversation in which I was first informed of the ban, after the actual ban was in effect. Therefore, reinforcing my original statement that the only time I broke the ban was before I was informed of its existence. It's amazing how fucking hilarious this continues to get. It's very difficult to take any of this seriously when no users who are enforcing this "ban" seem to be interested in the facts of this case and continue to enact bans, and extensions of the ban, before discussing the situation with the user in question. Which has now happened on numerous occasions. Ban me, I really don't care, because there's not a single piece of evidence to show that I've ever maliciously or intentionally vandalized any pages on Wikipedia. So I'm really not interested in being part of a "community" in which discipline is handed out based on hearsay and not facts. Funkatastic (talk) 13:11, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

what are you talking about? You were informed of the ban on February 4. You were informed of it again on February 12 after you broke it the first time. Then, you broke it on February 25 earning the block you are under now. I see two times you were informed of it prior to your edit. only (talk) 13:28, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I completely support the positions of Awilley and Only. Also, breaking rules (by violating your ban, which you clearly were informed of) and cussing and being non-civil toward the editors that tried to warn and inform you are both good reasons for the block. Personal attacks and non-civility aren't tolerated on Wikipedia, and arguing with your blockers isn't going to help you. I hope you keep all of this in mind, bud. Happy editing! ~Lord Laitinen~ (talk) 03:01, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sock puppetry

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

I have extended your block duration to "indefinite" for engaging in sock puppetry with the User:Mayanewday account. In order to regain editing privileges you will now have to appeal your block using the format listed in the generic block template above. I highly recommend reading the guide to appealing blocks (also linked above) first. Also, please note you are not allowed to remove the block templates from this page. ~Awilley (talk) 19:20, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

LOL User:Awiley, people aren't allowed to use WP at the library anymore? Thankfully this toxic environment has made me so very disinterested in editing here again, so go ahead keep me locked I will not be bothered (apparently I'm a sockpuppet, so what's stopping me from making another account exactly? You can clarify if you like but either way I won't be making a new one). I almost feel bad for User:Mayanewday but......apparently I'm a sockpuppet/troll so fuck it! right? Keep em blocked! Happy whomever got to find out just how batshit crazy this website is firsthand. Funkatastic (talk) 23:38, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Funkatastic. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:MPA BandCamp.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:MPA BandCamp.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:45, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:GucciManeTheOddfather.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:GucciManeTheOddfather.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:06, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:MeowtheJewels.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:MeowtheJewels.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:52, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:MacMillerFaces.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:MacMillerFaces.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:27, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]