User talk:SNAAAAKE!!

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from User talk:Niemti)
Jump to: navigation, search

Banned Indef-blocked

Header changed. ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  20:17, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Wow. You didn't even make it three days. Coming off of a one-month block, ending a 24 week period where you'd been blocked 4 times for 14 weeks total, you then immediately said "CONTEST THE FUCKING THINGS YOU DISAGREE FUCK", "jesus f christ", and "becuase you're too much of a dick to manually redits anything". This on top of reverting three times in a two hour period instead of providing an actual source for a potential BLP violation, and your usual arguing style of "Actually it's all very easy answers", "how could anyone even have any objections", and "This is all so obvious", showing that you've learned nothing from being blocked the last three times or so. You've been consistently incivil and argumentative for the past few years, and we never should have let this get so far.

You've been blocked 8 times over the past 2 years as Niemti/SNAAAAAKE!!, and 7 times over the course of a year as HanzoHattori for similar antics as well as SOCKing. You've been topic banned twice, and violated one of those bans directly and brushed up against the line for the other multiple times. I've had multiple editors contact me over the past year asking if I could block/ban you and pointing out prior socking violations, you were the subject of many, many threads at WT:VG simply to complain about your behavior to the point that you're an unofficially banned topic of discussion, and you've been used as an example to demonstrate that other people cannot be blocked or topic banned as long as no one is willing to ban you for much worse.

You do a ton of edits here on video game characters and terrorism suspects. And because of that, your behavior has been excused time and time again, much more than almost anyone else would be. But it's really not worth it any more. No matter how much editing you do, you are clearly a net drain on the project. I'm blocking you permanently, and will be on the lookout for any socks you create to continue editing. I suggest that you try to figure out why you have such anger issues with people disagreeing with you about minor facts and details on the internet, but Wikipedia is not here to be therapy. --PresN 19:56, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

@PresN:, my only qualm here is that administrators cannot 'ban' editors outright, they can only block them. The community can, arbitration, Jimmy himself, WMF, but editors standing alone cannot ban editors. You blocked him, you did not ban him, as you don't have that authority. Tutelary (talk) 20:15, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
I realized I had the term wrong and changed it in the text before I hit submit, but didn't change the heading. Thanks, and thanks Salvidrim for fixing it for me. --PresN 20:33, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Maybe you should see a guy being an antagonizing dick and REPEATEDLY vandalizing by removing over 12 kb of well sourced content (about half of the article) because he had a problem with literally 2 words. Oh wait, you've seen them. As for "potential BLP violation" in an article that is NOT a biography of living person (it was in controversies of non-living video game) - while her ACTUAL BIOGRAPHICAL ARTICLE is "potential BLP violation" because it's ALL UNSOURCED (a single "source" being her own book; also most of this article was curiously written by someone who only wrote this and nothing else). But of course you're biased because you hate me. your usual arguing style of "Actually it's all very easy answers", "how could anyone even have any objections", and "This is all so obvious", showing that you've learned nothing from being blocked the last three times or so. You've been consistently incivil and argumentative really? Oh well. I see you I'm just unwelcome. Fuck Wikipedia. Goodbye. --SNAAAAKE!! (talk) 09:25, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Oh, I'd like to say bye to: User:My very best wishes, User:Beemer69, User:Gabriel Yuji, User:Silver seren, User:Khazar2 (oh/she's "burned out by what a nasty place it's become", how not suprising) and everyone else I forgot but who's cool (I don't really even remember / got to know people here like at all, except a few of those who've kept harrassing me). If you want to reach me out I'm at [1] so you can say hi or whatever. I've also got a collection of scanned old mag pages that I wanted to some day use for video game articles (I think it's mostly fighting games and characters) but so far I've been mostly just collecting them you can have it. I'm overally way too depressed with my to even really care for some stupid fucking Wikipedia bullshit. --SNAAAAKE!! (talk) 09:54, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Abusively biased admin in action

But you know what? No, I'm not going to leave alone being framed by an abusive stalker admin like that for something where I wasn't even at fault.

Here's what happened:

  1. I add 12 kb of content with dozens of sources (also more or less rewrite the rest, even remove some stuff like CNN because it was misquoted).
  2. The user who's never edited the article before (stats) suddenly comes in and vandalizes it saying "wtf" ("what the fuck"): [2]
  3. I revert it providing a source (and I've been presenting the political orientations of the critics/attackers through the whole article Mortal Kombat controversies, including Democrat conseratives and liberals, Republicans, Christian groups, and so on, and even cited AP commenting how at one point the Democrates quited down and let the "Republicans to seize the high ground on moral values"): [3]
  4. He vandal-reverts again to make a point, and so it goes, then writes this after I ask him was it really hard to instead just remove the 1 word (as I eventually did myself) that was offending him for some reason: with "Your edits suck and are violations of policy": "Is it hard to not sneak in your unsourced anti-feminist bullshit into articles? More editors should keep their eyes on your. You are a detriment to the project, and very much so."

Not how he's freely identifying himself as another Wikistalker of myself - and I don't even remember interacting with this person anywhere else - and skipping through the 500 page (and the next 500 page too) I don't see even one other article that I've been active on, so it smells like some organized effort for this "More editors should keep their eyes on your." wikistalking. It's organized somewhere, I don't know where and by whom.

Then not how the oh-so vigilant User:PresN didn't as much as reprimend him for being "incivil and argumentative" (and vandalizing an article, and edit warring, and anything really). Just like another stalking amding of me Sergecross73 didn't react to me being recently called a "dickhead" here - he commented on my response to the troll, but didn't even comment on the troll for being "incivil and argumentative" or whatever. Such double standards.

And what's with Marsha Kinder's own actual BLP? It's possibly written mostly by herself or someone close to her, and is citing 1 pseudo-source which is her own book. But no one care (double standards again). They only care when I (accurately) call a feminist Marxist a "Marxist feminist" just like I called, say, Jack Thompson a "Christian conservative", and all the other positions.

So, what happened then? What I did next? I shrugged, removed "Marxist" (no matter Kinder has no problem with "applying Marxism"), because, who really cares? And I even ignored personal attacks against me, just like I've been ALWAYS ignoring it (see the "dickhead" trolling above for just one example, and apparently it is well accepted on Wikipedia because nobody ever cares when it happens it me). And I continued editing the article, adding about 5 kb of more sourced content and copy-editing the rest.

And then I was banned for it. For life no less.

True story. --SNAAAAKE!! (talk) 11:04, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

There was an unblock request, but on a second thought, no, I don't even want it. Presn is an awful admin, Wikipedia is a toxic place, but I don't care anymore. Stalkers rejoice. --SNAAAAKE!! (talk) 11:28, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Or not, becuase it's all such a travesty. The block says: "Long-term abuse and 15 prior blocks across three names". Note that 6 of these blocks in a row (all recent ones) were by Presn.[4] For as little as snide remarks such as "and welcome to Wikipedia". While selectively (and completely) ignoring everything that is directed at me. (Or at least I've never seen any evidence to contrary.) Now he bans me for being reacting angrily to a vandalism by a wikihounding stranger-stalker. The vandal's repeated (edit warring) "disruptive editing" on this article (which was 5 kb when I first came to it, and after over 200 edits of my it's now 40 kb) brought no reaction by Presn. Personal attacks too.

The fact's there's been a neverending abuse of me. See for example Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Ada Wong/1 which I just checked for the first time: "Agreed - this is a hallmark of Niemti/Snaake's awful writing: a parade of one liners and list positions which does not convey any kind of coherent themes (other than repeated sledgehammer references to sex), and is bloated and barely readable". (It was by the same troll who called me a "dickhead" and many people witnessed it and yet no one said anything.) And note how unwarranted this is: Ada Wong (the lead section now has a one-liner due anon vandalism that needs to be reverted). And to cite: "Note: this reassessment request is the first (and thus far only) edit on Wikipedia by user Roflcopter gamer. - it's gotta be some hater's sock account (contribs). Another example: Talk:Ultima Underworld: The Stygian Abyss "The "Release" section was added by the disruptive (and now blocked) editor User:Niemti back in November. ... I should add that Niemti's excessive inclusion of credits in the infobox goes against Wikipedia quality standards. ... Niemti is an infamous troublemaker." - for what? For adding things that SHOULD be in the article! (Contrary to the false claim, I actually did everything completely right. In fact, it was his removal of credits that is was vandalism.) Note that I COMPLETELY ignored the personal attack and baiting. I even ignored the vandalism, I was over it completely. It's not separate incidents. And this JimmyBlackwing person, I don't even know him (but he apparently knows so much about me, calling me "infamous troublemaker"). Where is it all coming from. That got to be some source, someone spreading these memes around, talking shit about me. And that "I've had multiple editors contact me over the past year asking if I could block/ban you". I'd like to see who. I wonder if I don't even know them too.

Take a look at my edits, how little I spend arguing with anyone on anything: last 500 edits. In fact recently I had much more edits UPLOADING IMAGES (replacing old white-background infobox images with opaque pngs - scores of them) then even discussing ANYTHING WITH ANYONE. But apparently just saying Actually it's all very easy answers", "how could anyone even have any objections", and "This is all so obvious", (I don't know "how could anyone even have any objections" with it too) is now being "incivil and argumentative" (it wasn't at all) so much one gets blocked for life.

If I'm unblocked I'm going to log out and retire anyway (actually I though about it for months). Just gracefully. And I guess I need to show Presn how awful and biased admin he is. Because he is. --SNAAAAKE!! (talk) 13:12, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

You're not blocked for life. If you truly desire unblocking you should delete the above and begin again. What you've posted here will not work. Tiderolls 13:21, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
What will not work? It's all facts. I can be called a "dickhead" and multiple admins present and seeing it in a discussion are 100% okay with it. But I say things like "Actually it's all very easy answers" and it's a block material. People who I enver interacted with stalk me and vandalize my work (my good work) and edit-wars (and knowingly, because he came to hypocritically annoy-warn me after several reverts of his own) and personally-attack me: My stalker-admin's reaction: no reaction whatsoever, it's nothing wrong, it's only wrong when I react to vandalism. It's all factual. I avoided discussing anything (I even ignored my watchlist!), much less arguing with anyone, what I did instead in these few days: uploading [scores of images, plus this, this, this, etc. It can all be checked. What the vandalizing, edit-warring, personal-attacking user who sparked it did in the same time (with no repercussions for him whatsoever): [5] - nothing, that was all he did during the same time, he only antagonized me with vandalism on the article he's never edited before, starting with "wtf" (-12.5 kb of sourced content). But I'm the bad guy. --SNAAAAKE!! (talk) 13:42, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Read WP:GAB. There are points to address in an unblock request and points to avoid. Your posts are almost 180 degrees from where they need to be. That's why I qualified my advice with "If you truly desire unblocking...; from the posts here the appearance is that you would rather rant than edit. Tiderolls 13:47, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Guess I'll read it so. If all that bullshit is somehow not enough. --SNAAAAKE!! (talk) 13:51, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
You should seriously consider deleting the present request and attendant posts. The longer this content stays the more likely that an admin will chance upon your request and decline it as not addressing the issue of your block. If that happens, then you will be prevented from deleting the declined request and the attendant discussion. Tiderolls 13:55, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
I was so easy on everything I even ignored this: [6] (there's no reason this unsourced article should exist, but I just let it go). All what happened was me saying "fucking ... fuck" to a guy who's started it by saying "what the fuck" while repeatedly vandalising my work that I've spent a lot of time and effort researching in books and newspapers from the 1990s. But when for example I'm called "dickhead" (and there's lots of admins watching it!), then no one cares, then it's okay. This is how it is. Btw do I know? You nick rings a bell but I can't remember. --SNAAAAKE!! (talk) 13:58, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Maybe from this or seeing my screen name on an article history. I've done a ton of HG work in the past. Tiderolls 14:07, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Well, so I've been annoyed this guy (he would later come back repeatedly as other IPs, pretty sure he's also this "Roflcopter gamer" sock account I mentioned above). The answer is it's explained in the article, and exactly in the reception section. I always try to make the lead just a short summary of the article's most important points, as it should be, so there are no refs (all my GAs and should-be-GAs are like that). Read WP:LEAD for details. --SNAAAAKE!! (talk) 14:21, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
I don't think any admins have questioned your content work. The problems I see you having are behaviorally based; my own interaction referenced in the diff above as an example. I asked a question and you dissed me. Did I block you? Did I even raise the issue again? You will not achieve any progress toward unblock if you continue to avoid the issue of your interaction with others. Tiderolls 14:32, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Except I avoided confrontations so much that I even ignored this crap when it showed in my notifications. All I did was getting angry at a rude vandal (who wasn't even even reprimended for his actions, which curiously were his only actions this month). Besides editing on literally hundreds of other articles, completely writing or rewriting, and uploading scores of images, without saying practcially anything to anyone, not even saying a word on any other talk page (neither user or article) besides when I requested to revert image bot edits that destroyed severasl images when I was away. You can see it: [7] --SNAAAAKE!! (talk) 15:09, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
For the record, you and Bridies both threw down personal attacks at one another, and I did not address either of you. I probably should had warned both of you, but I didn't because I was more concerned with the RFC at hand. I figured an uninvolved admin would warn you two. But considering I didn't warn either of you, I don't see how that's an example of a double standard... Sergecross73 msg me 14:11, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Really? And what I did there to provoke this troll to attack me? And a serious question: is he often talking shit about me? Like in this Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Ada Wong/1 which was by that "Rotflcopter" sock account? Because I don't do it with him, I don't even know what and how and where he edits, I know nothing about this guy and I don't care. (I care now.) --SNAAAAKE!! (talk) 14:21, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
I don't know, I haven't worked all that much with him or Ada Wong. Was your indef block related to arguing with Bridies? Sergecross73 msg me 14:30, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
I asked about in general, like maybe in among that clique of yours. I really wonder, now. (I also wonder if he's got a part in this cryptic "I've had multiple editors contact me over the past year asking if I could block/ban you", but this one you can't answer.) --SNAAAAKE!! (talk) 15:09, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, I don't know. I just stopped by to chime in since you called me out by name. Just wanted to clarify that your dif was not an example of a double standard, nor did it have any bearing on your current block. Sergecross73 msg me 15:50, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Nope, for the record, I haven't emailed or otherwise contacted anyone asking for you to be banned. Calling you a dickhead and your writing shit (whatever my actual wording was) I'm fairly sure was all. bridies (talk) 17:09, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

September 2014

Hey, N., sorry it came down to this. Thanks for the shout-out and for inspiring me to revise/clean up the MK character articles. I'll also upkeep the KM&J pages in the meantime. sixtynine • speak up • 02:57, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

Editors Barnstar.png The Editor's Barnstar
For your work at The Punisher (1993 video game). Freikorp (talk) 02:54, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

I've adopted the article The Punisher (1993 video game), and after many of my own edits I successfully nominated it for GA. How good the article already was when I came across it was the main reason I decided to take the time to upgrade it, so I just thought I should give credit where credit is due. I think it's a shame you are no longer active on wikipedia; I would have liked to work with you here as we seem to have similar interests. Freikorp (talk) 02:54, 3 October 2014 (UTC)


You, my good sir, rock! I feel really bad for you to be blocked without reason. (talk) 20:03, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

sup, there

File:Orologio rosso or File:Orologio verde DOT SVG (red clock or green clock icon, from Wikimedia Commons)
This blocked 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). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

SNAAAAKE!! (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribsdeleted contribsabuse filter logcreation logchange block settingsunblock)

Request reason:

Unjust bullshit. [8]

Decline reason:

Please read WP:Standard Offer; waiting for two years by itself isn't enough, you must also explain how you think you will avoid the behaviour that led to your block, and avoid creating any new reason not to unblock you (such as being rude or calling stuff billshit).  · Salvidrim! ·  14:23, 27 September 2016 (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.

Don't remmember the password. -- (talk) 13:39, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Orologio blu.svg
This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

SNAAAAKE!! (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribsdeleted contribsabuse filter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))

UTRS appeal #16628 was submitted on Sep 30, 2016 22:58:45. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 22:58, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Reposting from User talk:, where the request 2 days ago was:

  • Yes, as PresN has presented above, Niemti has been caught block evading many times in these last few years. Probably more times than listed above, and there's been a number of accounts and IPs that have been reported to me as well. Sergecross73 msg me 00:03, 1 October 2016 (UTC)