User talk:I'm On Base

Archives

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by .

I'm On Base's Current talk page


Wikipedia ads	file info – show another – #109

userbox

how about this one, bro.

This user is a fan of I'm On Base

3nih (talk)

RfB

Just now, someone tranascluded the RfB you created a couple of days ago to WP:RFA. I've removed it. Was this what you wanted, or was this done without your knowledge? --barneca (talk) 01:35, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your RfB

I strongly suggest you immediately withdraw your RfB. You are completely unqualified for this position, and your nomination reflects badly on you. It will be rejected. Please save yourself and everyone else the trouble of multiple opposes before it is closed early by someone else. Thanks, Gwernol 01:36, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gwernol, User:LAX transcluded it, not I'm on Base. I'm not entirely sure I'm on Base even knew it was live, and suspect this was a test. I've removed it from WP:RFA (see above), and plan to delete it as a test page unless I'm on Base gives me a good reason not to. I'm on Base, is this OK with you? --barneca (talk) 01:40, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this is certainly possible, although I'm On Base accepted his self-nomination, so deserves at least some of the "credit" for this. Gwernol 02:06, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I'm On Base didn't accept the nomination, even though it was a self nom. I've also asked the admin who transcluded to comment on their talk. SynergeticMaggot (talk) 02:21, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm... perhaps you're right. I was reading this as a signed acceptance. I guess it technically doesn't say "I accept", though I initially read it as an accepted RfB. Gwernol 02:26, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I closed the RfB, as you are not an admin yet, and this is grounds to immediately remove and close. I suggest you read WP:ADMIN and WP:CRAT, as well as anything in Category:Wikipedia adminship. Please don't let this stop you from contributing to wikipedia. Best wishes. SynergeticMaggot (talk) 02:04, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

mushroomhead7697

he is a sockpuppet of TheGoodSide. he made it first and used his "good" account and the sockpuppet one one for evil

This blocked user's request to have autoblock on their IP address lifted has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request.

I'm On Base (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

67.189.185.73 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

Block message:

Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "Mushroomhead7697". The reason given for Mushroomhead7697's block is: "Vandalism-only account".

Blocking administrator: Discospinster (talk • blocks)

Decline reason: For violating our Wikipedia:Sock puppetry policy which prohibits the use of multiple accounts you have now been blocked from editing Wikipedia for two weeks. Should you breach the trust of the Wikipedia community once more in this manner you may face a permanent ban from the site. -- Netsnipe ► 04:29, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Since I've now confirmed that this isn't your first time violating WP:SOCK, you can now consider yourself indefinitely banned from Wikipedia now. -- Netsnipe ► 04:36, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I've deleted all sub-pages save User:I'm On Base/Awards and User:I'm On Base/Guestbook (Lists to watch for possible existing socks); and the talk page archives. - jc37 05:14, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at this and wondering if we need a checkuser. - jc37 05:49, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

please

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).

I'm On Base (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

please. i am sorry. i wanted to be a good user. and i am serious about my brothers. please unblock me

Decline reason:

Your brothers have nothing to do with your block. This request does not convince me that you were blocked in error. — Sandstein (talk) 12:27, 10 May 2008 (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).

I'm On Base (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

i am not a sock puppeteer. my brother TheGoodSide is the puppeteer. he is puppeting Mushroomhead7697.

Decline reason:

Well, then, your brother has gotten you blocked. Take it up with him. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 14:34, 11 May 2008 (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).

I'm On Base (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

see this page. my brother admits it.

Decline reason:

According to that, you are a sockpuppet of User:3nih Gwernol 21:23, 11 May 2008 (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).

I'm On Base (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

i am not a puppeteer. and neither is my brother 3nih. TheGoodSide my other brother is a puppeteer for mushroomhead7697. why doesn't anyone believe me.

Decline reason:

Because from our end its impossible to prove your story. An see WP:MEATPUPPET. — MBisanz ^talk 00:16, 12 May 2008 (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).

I'm On Base (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

see my brother 3nih's talk page. it explans everything

Decline reason:

It explains nothing. Since you keep repeating the same reasons over and over again, I'm protecting your talk page. Email the unblock list if you still want to contest this. — Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 02:44, 12 May 2008 (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).

I'm On Base (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I admit to being the sockpuppeter and I am sorry. I mean REALLY SORRY. Please unblock me.

Decline reason:

This does not address why we should consider unblocking you. — -- lucasbfr ^talk 12:54, 22 June 2008 (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).

I'm On Base (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am sorry and I won't ever use sockpuppets EVER and I will follow the rules. I am sorry and I will make it up to the comunity. I AM SORRY. please unblock me.

Decline reason:

No, not now. You've burnt your bridges for a while. Try again in a year or so. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 14:18, 22 June 2008 (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).

I'm On Base (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

okay its been a while since i have tried for an unblock. i have developed the patience to become a trusted user who wont sockpuppet or myspace or any of that stuff. i believe its been a while since i have tried so i am requesting my unblock Just so you know, I'm On Base and you're not. 20:13, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

See below. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 03:33, 13 August 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.

Hey I'm On Base, I'm glad to see you back here after waiting about a year. I see you're willing to contribute positively this time, so I hope your request is granted. Cheers, iMatthew ^talk at 20:45, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to be the first to decline, but just so you know you may have to take this one up with ArbCom. Exploding Boy (talk) 23:01, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am not inclined to unblock. The following would help. First, apart from the possibility that you might not continue to abuse Wikipedia, I don't see what Wikipedia stands to gain from unblocking you. What would you contribute if unblocked? Second, it's impossible to unblock you without you giving a full list of all your alternate accounts and IP addresses: as it stands now your last word on the subject is to continue to deny that you had ever used sockpuppets: that cannot stand. Mango juice^talk 05:38, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Mangojuice. Please post a new unblock request with the following information:

The areas you would like to contribute in, and how you intend to do so
A list of all accounts you have used, including any IP addresses you are aware of. Do not omit any; this can be verified.

You may also wish to review this guide for more information, and you may want to consider following the instructions here as well. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 03:33, 13 August 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).

I'm On Base (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am very sorry for sockpupprting and being a negative influence on wikipedia, but I will become a positive one by editing Wrestling articles that need fixing. Also I will not edit my (or anybody elses) userpage for at least 1 year (will never edit another person's userpage except in the case of vandalism). Also while I dont remember my IP addresses I can confirm that the IP address that I made this account with is no longer in effect. I will agree to a mentoring system as long as it is needed, and I will be as positive as I can.

Decline reason:

Per Anthony.bradbury below. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:14, 22 September 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.

You have not as yet given us the alternative account names which you used simultaneously. This is absolutely essential as a preliminary to any consideration of your request. --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 18:25, 20 September 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).

I'm On Base (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

well....i cant really remember what the names of those account however I dont think u guys missed any of my socks....then again......u could do a IP check, but I dont remember the name of the IP. However, I think it is back in the page history maybe. Just so you know, I'm On Base and you're not. 23:23, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Decline. No new developments. Locking this page as well. Hiberniantears (talk) 01:54, 5 October 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.