User talk:Keating 1991
THE THINGS THAT MATTER[edit]
Oh Arthur Calwell I meant to say did not want Gough Whitlam as his deputy. --Keating 1991Keating 1991 (talk) 16:21, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
--Keating 1991Keating 1991 (talk) 14:33, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
October/November 2010[edit]
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to User talk:Ruhrfisch, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. The reverted edit can be found here. Thank you. Airplaneman ✈ 06:59, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors, as you did on User_talk:Fastily#Blocking_user. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. You are welcome to rephrase your comment as a civil criticism of the article. Thank you. Please refrain from derogatory comments about other editors (such as User:Eaglestorm) as you did on User:Fastily's talk page. ROBERTMFROMLI TALK/CNTRB 07:02, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
- I have blocked you from editing for a day for mass-posting of accusations against another user; if you are actually a sockpuppet, the block will be soon increased to indefinite. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 07:10, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
- Permanently blocked per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Whitmore 8621. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 07:25, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
Unblock request[edit]
Keating 1991 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I was abused, cyber bullied by Eaglestorm and Wikipedia lets him get away with it he upset me, he abuses numerous Wikipedia contributors he is a horrible user and he does not get blocked at all, I admit i did wrong in editing some ways but I will leave this encyclopedia forever if my blemcast edit was added back to Metal Gear Solid and Eaglestorm is blocked for a while for what he has done. --Keating 1991Keating 1991 (talk) 07:32, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
Decline reason:
WP:NOTTHEM. Sandstein 08:33, 31 October 2010 (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.
Eh di Inamin mo rin! Gago ka pala, eh! (And so you admitted it anyway! You're such a dumb fool!). Whitmore, to be honest, you're nothing more than a lost cause who thinks he can rebuild himself here just because you're editing articles about politics in your backyard. You go forumshopping and advocating a block on me just to deflect attention off your on-wiki sins. Me, a horrible user? Look who's talking, you who proposed shunning WP several times as long as an edit you've forced just as many times stays, you who cry and whine "cyberbullying" when you're unmasked as a sock on each and every occasion, you who suppresses unfavourable discussions under the guise of archiving, you who...aagh, I'm no longer elaborating on all of your horsecrap. You're the one who did everything but heap all the blame for it on me and everyone else. What a sniveling little [expletive deleted due to NPA]. You may be a good guy (emphasis on MAY BE, but even that is a stretch), but as a WP editor, you're no better than the worst sockturds and haughty, railroading editors I've ever come across in four years of being here. You should have taken the advice given on all those unblock requests when you had the chance, but no, you just had to prove to everyone how disruptive an editor you are. So pitiful. --Eaglestorm (talk) 15:10, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
Yeah Eaglestorm funny, I remember almost a year ago how you said on the Nixon Peace Walker this is what you said "A certain anon has been putting up stuff about the game's supposed connections with President Nixon's resignation and has even bitched about it being removed many times, even on my talk page. I wonder where are the refs. Word of advice, find the refs, then put it in. Until then, don't edit. --Eaglestorm (talk) 16:14, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
" This is what you said this proves you are a LIAR thing you would leave it if it was sourced your like the Australian politician John Howard of Wikipedia. You reverted my Bleemcast material and interred in my other edits and you back in August raised the factor of what Taelus said about me editing where you edit well you came into the areas i edit such as Dwayne Johnson you hypercritical lying horrible cyber bullying person. I admit I could have handled it better but some on wikipedia were ignoring me and would not leave me alone, I just wanted that Bleemcast left on the page which was there for months then you removed, You are a very cruel person, Your not innocent either. If you just let me have my way with the Bleemcast I would to be talking to you now but you had to track me down just like the internet stalker you are, so hypercritical oh and Im not dumb im smart in a sense that I overcame a simple blocking and I reported what you did and oh I do not hide my sins I archived the stuff that was old and long, I did not care if I was editing from a account or a IP address just remember you are a Liar as in
"A certain anon has been putting up stuff about the game's supposed connections with President Nixon's resignation and has even bitched about it being removed many times, even on my talk page. I wonder where are the refs. Word of advice, find the refs, then put it in. Until then, don't edit. --Eaglestorm (talk) 16:14, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
"THE THINGS THAT MATTER" --Keating 1991Keating 1991 (talk) 16:07, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
Unblock request 2[edit]
Keating 1991 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I would like to be unblocked if this was to happen I would never sockpuppet or evade block ever again but it is possible I will not get unblocked and also regarding the fact I just want this crisis resolved , I admit I have done wrong but talkpage access on my old account was revoked. --Keating 1991Keating 1991 (talk) 12:18, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I'm afraid we have heard this all before. As you have been told previously, go for 6 months at least without any sockpuppetry, then request an unblock on your original account via the unblock mailing list, or by e-mailing an admin. ---Taelus (Talk) 13:37, 31 October 2010 (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.
Unblock Request 3[edit]
{{Well alright I accept I am gone for 6 months if thats what it takes however I have proof that my adversary Ealgestorm is a liar Read this ""A certain anon has been putting up stuff about the game's supposed connections with President Nixon's resignation and has even bitched about it being removed many times, even on my talk page. I wonder where are the refs. Word of advice, find the refs, then put it in. Until then, don't edit. --Eaglestorm (talk) 16:14, 21 December 2009 (UTC)". That I will leave this encyclopedia forever if my Bleemcasrt is added back to Metal Gear Solid and Ealgestorm is blocked for a while for his sickening contributions. Oh unless otherwise the unblock request from what I know is the only way to talk to Admistrators while being blocked. I would like to go back to editing but if my request was met which it will most likely not I am happy to leave Wikipedia and to never sock puppet again or vandalize I swear on my Grandparents names I am telling the truth. --Keating 1991Keating 1991 (talk) 16:17, 31 October 2010 (UTC)}}
Keating 1991 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Yeah Eaglestorm funny, I remember almost a year ago how you said on the Nixon Peace Walker this is what you said "A certain anon has been putting up stuff about the game's supposed connections with President Nixon's resignation and has even bitched about it being removed many times, even on my talk page. I wonder where are the refs. Word of advice, find the refs, then put it in. Until then, don't edit. --Eaglestorm (talk) 16:14, 21 December 2009 (UTC) " This is what you said this proves you are a LIAR thing you would leave it if it was sourced your like the Australian politician John Howard of Wikipedia. You reverted my Bleemcast material and interred in my other edits and you back in August raised the factor of what Taelus said about me editing where you edit well you came into the areas i edit such as Dwayne Johnson you hypercritical lying horrible cyber bullying person. I admit I could have handled it better but some on wikipedia were ignoring me and would not leave me alone, I just wanted that Bleemcast left on the page which was there for months then you removed, You are a very cruel person, Your not innocent either. If you just let me have my way with the Bleemcast I would to be talking to you now but you had to track me down just like the internet stalker you are, so hypercritical oh and Im not dumb im smart in a sense that I overcame a simple blocking and I reported what you did and oh I do not hide my sins I archived the stuff that was old and long, I did not care if I was editing from a account or a IP address just remember you are a Liar as in "A certain anon has been putting up stuff about the game's supposed connections with President Nixon's resignation and has even bitched about it being removed many times, even on my talk page. I wonder where are the refs. Word of advice, find the refs, then put it in. Until then, don't edit. --Eaglestorm (talk) 16:14, 21 December 2009 (UTC) "THE THINGS THAT MATTER" --Keating 1991Keating 1991 (talk) 16:07, 31 October 2010 (UTC). This SECTION EXPLAINS MY OPINON AND MY REASONS I WOULD LIKE TO BE UNBLOCKED VERY MUCH AND WOULD NEVER SOCK PUPPET BUT I AM STRATING TO SEE THAT WOULD NEVER HAPPEN JUST PLEASE ADD THE BLEEMCAST LINK BUT TO Metal Gear Solid and block Ealgestorm I am not the only one he has abused in some form or the other. --Keating 1991Keating 1991 (talk) 16:29, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
Decline reason:
This appears to be yet another rant against other editors instead of an unblock request. As you've been informed that this is not a proper use for this template, I have disabled your talk page access. Kuru (talk) 17:03, 31 October 2010 (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.
- You wrote: "Well alright I accept I am gone for 6 months if thats what it takes however I have proof that my adversary Ealgestorm is a liar Read this ""A certain anon has been putting up stuff about the game's supposed connections connections with President Nixon's resignation and has even bitched about it being removed many times, even on my talk page. I wonder where are the refs. Word of advice, find the refs, then put it in. Until then, don't edit. --Eaglestorm (talk) 11:14 am, 21 December 2009, Monday (10 months, 10 days ago) (UTC−5)"
- This seems to be implying that you are admitting to being that "certain anon" and thus take offense at the statement. Are you trying to say that, besides socking using this account, you also in the past had been using Wikipedia as an anon to avoid scrutiny (your other account predates that post)? Or is this just some unrelated thing - because even assuming the text (lacking a diff) is correct, you are pointing to an event that happened almost a year ago directed at an anon. Best, ROBERTMFROMLI TALK/CNTRB 20:28, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
- Robert, it's the same guy. I know, I made the SPI that nailed his hide. --Eaglestorm (talk) 01:43, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
- This seems to be implying that you are admitting to being that "certain anon" and thus take offense at the statement. Are you trying to say that, besides socking using this account, you also in the past had been using Wikipedia as an anon to avoid scrutiny (your other account predates that post)? Or is this just some unrelated thing - because even assuming the text (lacking a diff) is correct, you are pointing to an event that happened almost a year ago directed at an anon. Best, ROBERTMFROMLI TALK/CNTRB 20:28, 31 October 2010 (UTC)