User talk:Honda Enoch

Here's a little hint:

I DON'T CARE

PLEASE READ THE ABOVE STATEMENT BEFORE POSTING ANYTHING HERE!

Mark VI monorail

Hello. Can you help me understand why you reverted this edit? Thanks, — Kralizec! (talk) 13:41, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Because the person said they removed the information because it did not have citation when it clearly did. Honda Enoch (talk) 19:40, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

While the information in question does have a citation, that citation does not appear to support the claim. Additionally your revert appears to have re-introduced grammatical errors that Larrymcp had fixed. — Kralizec! (talk) 20:35, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have NO right to block me under false claims that I am someone else. I went to WP sockpuppet page and found nothing on there that would give you any reason to say I am a sockpuppet. I have even go to HeadMouse page and see nothing there that would make you think I am them. You need to provide me with some reason why you think I am someone else? The only reason I can see you are doing this is because I put my monorail map up. I see that you undid all my edits and even deleted my image. I think you owe me an apology. Honda Enoch (talk) 08:00, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

HeadMouse sock blocked

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for repeated abuse of editing privileges. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. — Kralizec! (talk) 20:41, 13 March 2010 (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).

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

Request reason:

Sorry I had not looked up what a "sockpuppet" was. Why am I being called this? I am not a sockpuppet. What make you think I am?

Decline reason:

I am declining your request for unblock because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
- understand what you have been blocked for,
- will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
- will make useful contributions instead.

Please read our guide to appealing blocks for more information. Sandstein 07:59, 14 March 2010 (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).

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

Request reason:

I don't know what you want me to say or how I am to prove i am not someone else? I mean if I was blocked for putting the monorail map image up I could understand ans I would sya fine don't use it. but this claim that I am a sockpuppet with no reason to claim that is not right. Kralizec! has not said any reason why they think I am a sockpuppet. No I have not been on WP for 10 years or anything but I have been on here since some time last year, I think around Christmas time when I was looking up information about mistletoe plants. I just don't think this is right that I am being blocked for no reason. I have been reading the WP rules and I will say that if Kralizec! wanted to temp block me for the 3 edit rule becasue I posted the monorail map 3 times, then fine I can accept that. but that does not mean I am a sockpuppet. I have clicked every link I can in trying to research any evidence or investigation to say I am or not a sockpuppet and can find nothing. So please I ask this block be removed. I will gladly leave the monorail article and not go back to it. I have also noticed that Kralizec! has gone to all of my contributions and removed them as seen below.

Decline reason:

This intersection of contributions certainly appears that both entities are the same person. The edit summaries use the same grammar, the style of interactions with other editors are virtually identical. Here's a hint: if you are HeadMouse, and you want to edit Wikipedia, you're more than welcome to request unblock using that account. Opening a second account is officially the evasion of a block. We're forgiving folks - the standard offer suggests that unblocks could be possible - but that might just be problematic after block evasion. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 13:06, 14 March 2010 (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.

Example 1: http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Hampster_Dance&action=history

Nothing in those discussion pages that I posted was a WP violation,, it was just general discussion. I don't understand why Kralizec! is treating me this way. I do not know them and have never done anything to them. Thank you and I hope this can be resolved soon. Honda Enoch (talk) 08:16, 14 March 2010 (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).

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

Request reason:

Since I am not HeadMouse, it would be impossible for me to log in to that account to request an unblock for there. Your This intersection of contributions shows nothing other then I am a Disney Monorail fan and I visited the same articles as HeadMouse. There is no real evidence of any of the claims. So I ask again that this block be lifted since I have not broken any rules other then the 3RR rule. Thank You

Decline reason:

The intersection does not prove anything by itself. The behavior does, and you sound and look like HeadMouse. Tim Song (talk) 08:45, 15 March 2010 (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).

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

Request reason:

I sound and look like everyone else that has edited that article. Again. I am not a sockpuppet, and since no one has shown any evidence that would show that I am, other then "you look like a duck." or "your editing the same article headmouse edited." None of that holds any real water. Are you going to block everyone that edits that article just becasue they have an interest in the same thing some moron did? If so, then you might as well just lock the article and save time. So again I request this block be lifted if for no other reason then to give me a chance to prove I am not what I am accused of being.

Decline reason:

If we believe you are a sockpuppet, as far as Wikipedia's concerned, you are. We reserve all rights to decide who has editing privileges. — Daniel Case (talk) 04:10, 16 March 2010 (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.

I have protected the page since you've made three unblock requests that pretty much make the same argument. Daniel Case (talk) 04:12, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please read with unblock review

I don't want to be accused of abusing the unblock request so I will add this here. Anyone reviewing my unblock request, please read this too. I had and have no intention of disrupting Wikipedia for any reason. I just came here now and then when I Google search something and it gives me a Wikipedia article on it. I did not mean to cause any problems with the monorail map issue. I was just trying to make it easier for people to understand the map. I know when I first saw it I was not sure what was what. I even noted my concerns in the discussion page. the other changes I made to the article were to try and add information. When I reverted the speed edit. as I explained above when Kralizec! I reverted it because the person that removed the information said they did so becasue it did not have citation, but when I looked at the version prior to the edit it did have citation. then Kralizec! explained that even though it had citation the page it cited did not give the same information. So I seen why it was changed I did not argue with Kralizec!about it or anything. I did not even have time to say or do anything becasue by the time I came back in I was blocked.

The point I am getting at, and to make a long story short. I honestly am sorry for any problems I may have caused and I promise that I will do my best to not cause any more problems. I will check, recheck, and check again before making any edits to any Wikipedia article. So I ask that my block please be lifted so I can show that what I say is true.

Thank You Honda Enoch (talk) 09:17, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As I say above - since we're forgiving folks, I would recommend requesting unblock using your original account - however, make sure that you address all of the issues. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 13:07, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is my ONLY account. What you posted above is no warrant to claim I am a sockpuppet. I don't understand why just becasue I am a Disney monorail fan and therefor visited the articles here about the trains that that makes me a sockpuppet? Honda Enoch (talk) 14:24, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed your unblock - the directions clearly say "if you use a "URL, you must add 1= in front of your unblock" ... I have done it for you. I will not personally re-review your request as I am still not convinced at this point. Another admin may see it differently, so it remains open for them. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 14:46, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks I was doing that but you beat me to it. :) I am sorry you are not convinced, I do not know what else to say to convince you. I will say this. If I WAS headmouse, and you told me that by going to that accnt and requesting another unblock that it could possibly be lifted, then don't you think I would do that? I have not reason to sit here and lie about who I am. I do not know you or Kralizec! or anyone else on here and have no reason to try and lie my way around the internet. My main point here is that I am being accused of something I am not guilty of. If you want to block me for breaking the 3RR rule then I will say Sorry and take the block. But to block me for something I and not guilty of is just not right in my book. Honda Enoch (talk) 14:54, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]