User talk:Big Luth

WrestleMania XXV

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 may also click on the signature button 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. TJ Spyke 22:42, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are you Luther Hull? There are several signs that indicate to me you are, and if you are you will be blocked as a sockpuppet. I have asked an admin for their opinion and am thinking about asking for a check user report (where they would be able to determine if you and Luther Hull are the same user). TJ Spyke 17:29, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. The fact that you have similar names, you registered 2 days after he got blocked, you have similar editing patterns, you both went against consensus by moving "WrestleMania XXV" to "The 25th Anniversary of WrestleMania" (and even used the exact same edit summary). Too many things add up. If you really are separate, you have nothing to worry about. TJ Spyke 17:35, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Using a Sockpuppet to get around a ban results in the new account getting automatically banned too. TJ Spyke 17:45, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Read the many discussions at WP:PW on this. There are multiple names that could be considered correct for the event. Besides, using a sockpuppet to get around a ban is against the rules whether you make good edits or bad edits with the sockpuppet. TJ Spyke 17:50, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinitely blocked

This account is a suspected sockpuppet of Luther Hull (talk · contribs · logs) and has been blocked indefinitely.
Please refer to editing habits or contributions of the sockpuppet for evidence. This policy subsection may be helpful.

Account information: block log – contribs – logs – abuse log – CentralAuth

Due to block evasion of User:Luther Hull through comparing editing patterns and WP:DUCK. You have been indefinitely blocked. To appeal, you may request an unblock by using the unblock template. -MBK₀₀₄ 19:29, 26 February 2009 (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).

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

Request reason:

I'm appealing on two grounds: A. I was unfairly banned the first time, and I wanted to contribute so I had no choice but to make another account. B. This: http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Iar Thank you for listening.

Decline reason:

The sockpuppet account won't be unblocked no matter what. If you don't understand why the original account was blocked (and it sounds as if you don't), then the original account isn't likely to be unblocked, either, because of the likelihood of your causing the same problems again. FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 23:00, 26 February 2009 (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).

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

Request reason:

It's not a "sockpuppet" its just a new name so to speak, come on, what are we trying to do here? Are we going to get on with it and build an encyclopedia or enforce stupid rules that help none of us? Look through my edits on THIS account, you won't see one piece of vandalism? So come on unblock me and let me continue to contribute.

Decline reason:

It wasn't the account name that was blocked; it you the person. This account won't be unblocked no matter what. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 23:17, 26 February 2009 (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).

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

Request reason:

I'm sorry, this is ridiculous. I was following this: http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Iar I clearly couldn't contribute on the old account as I was not given chance to explain myself by unreasonable administrators (see a pattern here?), so I decided that in order to contribute the only way I could do it would be to create a new account. Which I made no disruptive edits on (which I never did on purpose on the old account, but there you go..)I didn't realise you had to be part of a select group to edit Wikipedia, its uniqueness is that everyone can edit it, apparently this is not true. Please consider by unblock request as I am only here to help contribute to Wikipedia but I'm being stifled by a technicality. If you are only going to post "Against the rules, banned" or something like that I'd rather you left it to an administrator who is interested in improving Wikipedia and not stroking their own ego. Thank you.

Decline reason:

"Ignore all rules" does not justify your actions of vandalism and subsequent block evasion. Your page moves were disruptive and your attacks even more so. You've continued this on this account as well, so yes, you're blocked. Appeal on your main account; this page is locked down now. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:59, 26 February 2009 (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.