Jump to content

User talk:LighteningHeroZero80

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sockpuppetry case

[edit]

Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Bambifan101 for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 01:07, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

April 2010

[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, but at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to The Pebble and the Penguin, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ClueBot.

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to the page Boohbah. Such edits constitute vandalism and are reverted. Please do not continue to make unconstructive edits to pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you.  Mephistophelian † 01:16, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not vandalize pages, as you did with this edit to Finding Nemo. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. Geoff Who, me? 01:17, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Say, Bambi...

[edit]

While I have your attention, you should be aware of the following e-mail correspondence between me and the fellow whose organization owns and runs this site. You have stepped in it big time, young man. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 02:58, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]


On 3/20/10 1:54 AM, PMDrive1061 wrote:> Hello, Jimbo. :)>> My friend, I've been involved on and off with Wikipedia virtually since its inception and never have I ever seen a more destructive vandal than an unsupervised child with a dynamic IP down in Mobile, Alabama.>> http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:LTA/BF101>> I am still very proud to be a part of such a worthwhile project, but I am burning out big time over this. I blocked five ranges and his school IP and still he keeps coming. He's almost certainly autistic, but he has a real sadistic streak as well.>> I've just expanded the block on the five IPs from a 0/16 to a 0/24. I may have just shut off most of BellSouth in Alabama because of this kid, but I honestly don't know what else to do. I'd filed a oomplaint with BellSouth back in December, apparently to no avail.>> Jimbo, I am BEGGING you to step in and put a stop to this monster with a formal, written complaint to BellSouth. He has got to be stopped. I'm tired of blocking this monkey and reverting his childish garbage.>> Please feel free to write back via my personal e-mail: xxxxx>> Have a great weekend and I look forward to hearing from you soon.>> Regards,> xxxx> "PMDrive1061"> "Lucky 6.9">

From: Jimmy Wales (xxxxxxx) Sent: Sat 3/20/10 12:48 PM To: PMDrive1061 (xxxxxx) )

Hi! I'm on a plane right now and can't check the page, but I'm happy to do this. Here's what would help: 1. If you can email me the text of the page that I need to read, so I can speak intelligently in my email. 2. If you can give me the proper email address at BellSouth to make a formal complaint. I'm about to take a 10 day near-sabbatical while doing a program at Harvard, so I'll only be online for about an hour a day. Therefore, I might be a little slow at getting things done for a bit. --Jimbo

All I did was write about a freaking idiot mockbuster movie of Charlotte's Web. Because Charlotte's Web is a classic, people should know about this stupid rip-off. Could you at least redirect it to the Michael Schelp like An Ant's Life is? I would like the content merged too. And also, have you stopped protecting my target pages? I'm still not that Disneator retard either if you don't belive me. That is some imposter. I don't know if it's on propose or not but it probably is. Go ahead, block this talk page. I still plan to prove my worth some day. You will see. So you can chin up. Charlotte is awesome. LighteningHeroZero80 (talk) 12:04, 1 April 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).

LighteningHeroZero80 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

PMDrive is mean, sorry to say it but it's true. This is the nicest way to put compared to all the trolls, but really, is mean. mean to the bone. The Charlotte's Web article SO needs more work. If you keep with this blocking type stuff eventually Collectionian WILL be imvoled again with Charlotte's Web like The Fox and the Hound. The page needs work! All these Disney and animation stuff does! If the articles weren't so bad (or crappy), maybe I would have never come here to improve them. GET BETTER ARTICLES ON ANIMATION STUFF! This is insane.

Decline reason:

You're absolutely correct. This IS insane. I left this talk page open in the hopes you'd leave a reasonable request, but it seems you're true to form with your usual litanies. If you want to be unblocked, there is only one way to do it. Start with following the instructions at WP:UNBLOCK. Just creating all these damned sockpuppets will get you nowhere and rest assured I will be contacting the foundation regarding your possible unblock request. I'm simply going to point out what you've done here in the past and let them make their own decision. They give you the green light and you get no hassles UNLESS you start back in with the crap edits. PMDrive1061 (talk) 23:18, 1 April 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.

OK, does crap edits=my "prevered" aka "vandalized" versions of The Fox and the Hound, Charlotte's Web 2, Bambi, ect. and/or the Spider's Web: A Pig's Tale? I have run out of most hope on this either way, unless you do know that Disneator guy was/is an imposter. But that was in total about 10 or 20 socks at most, I have hundereds of real ones. And about the Pig's Tale, was it unnotable all together or just not supposed to be sock created? Yes I know I can't create a page without it getting deleted, but would it have been ok if someone else did the page or did it fail notabity? Thanks anyway for not blocking the talk page. LighteningHeroZero80 (talk) 23:24, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's exactly what I mean. You either delete legitimate content, add your own comments or both. This is why all of your edits via all of your sockpuppets get reverted; they simply do no good. As far as that "Pig's Tale" article is concerned, it was deleted because you created it in violation of your ban. Now, if you had done what I'd suggested and allowed yourself to be mentored, you would have credit for the new article and we wouldn't be having this exchange.

At this point, your options are as follows: Plead your case to the foundation and hope they lift your ban or keep on logging on after years of blocks just to have the door slammed in your face. You've driven me and a lot of other users absolutely nuts, the man who founded the site might be getting involved in this matter and I'm still giving you advice. Yeah, some meanie I am. I've only tried to help you three times now. PMDrive1061 (talk) 23:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So where do I go? I remember I asked could I appeal as Snehvide og de syv dværge but Collectionian reported it as abuse and it was locked both the edit privileges and the talk page itself. Now the account is globally locked, like all the others save some non-suls (yes Bambifan101 was created at en then simple without autocreation). I wonder though if An Ant's Life and Spark Plug Entertainment were only notable enough for redirect links, would the same apply to A Pig's Tale? And yes I still think it's an idiot movie to the point that I can't stop laughing at it. Which is why I also decided to use that as a form of revenge on other wikis. However if I can't find good sources for it other than imdb and a blog post does that fail notablity? Like I said I think if I can't add to Charlotte's Web and others unless Collectionian does I don't know who will. Have you noticed though my prevered edits at Charlotte's Web 2 still exist in the simple english wiki? As well as the triva about the first movie a few minor goofs in the animation of the movie. However on The Lion King II and especially The Lion King 1½ I still don't see the disscusions that said soundtrack lists aren't allowed; all I see is Collectionian comments about it but no disscusion like the use of the fy template as well as eggy linking and succession boxes. If you notice though I have tried to undo the egg link to 1973 on Charlotte's Web, and well as the missing commas and the 2003 egg link as well. The reason it looks like I removed content is because I did those changes will removing the space after the infobox, so it isn't as easy to compare the diffs. Too bad I write so much. LighteningHeroZero80 (talk) 00:04, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I forgot something: On September 11 in 2007 Okapi7 created List of Open Season characters, which to me screams cruft. A lot of people contributed, but it lacks notibality and most of the users did reverts, general maintanice, or were all most all ips. At best it could redirect to Open Season (film) and maybe be merged there (with cleanup and a complete redo) but that's about it. I still don't like User:AnthonyA99's edits to Open Season 2 in the least; at least I tried to redo the page to restore all the info he and other people deleted and remove all the cruft ("Boog (Mike Epps), the main protagonist, and Elliot (Joel McHale) are back for more crazy adventures!" "Can a toy poodle really bring down a 900-pound grizzly bear? Will Elliot every marry Giselle? Find out in Open Season 2![1]". Are you sure AnthonyA99 isn't MascotGuy and/or Codyfink? If not I don't know who he is but he's clearly the same guy as that ip that I kept doing massive reverts of as Snehvide og de syv dværge. The whole time I said he was me just so somebody would block him, but it took Collectionian's involvement to stop him. I still wonder why this Disneator/Cartooner32/Animoviera14 person decided to follow me around, but it's as annoying as hell! He must think protaginist means male character, and that you can only have one when such masterpieces as The Fox and the Hound, The Princess and the Frog, and SpongeBob SquarePants have proved that wrong. LighteningHeroZero80 (talk) 00:19, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you're pretty "high profile." It shouldn't be much of a surprise when you start having copycats disrupt the site. A list of the "Open Season" characters would be a perfectly legit article; no need for a redirect. On the other hand, "cruft" right off of a promo sheet has no place in the article. So yes, you're right on that account. If nonsense about the poodle and the grizzly bear were on the article, then it should have been removed. Problem: Technically, you aren't allowed to remove it. FYI, I have e-mailed the Arbitration Committee to inform them that you would be contacting them. I did not tell them to reject your appeal, only to expect it. Understand that if you are given a chance, it will be under strict conditions. If you blow it, there will be no second chance. I have the technical power to allow you to edit, but I don't have the authority at this point since it's simply gone too far. PMDrive1061 (talk) 00:42, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So what link do I click? Also, are the Open Season characters more notable then The Fox and the Hound or Charlotte's Web or even The Princess and the Frog characters? Because even the List of The Lion King characters article was merged into a better article about the franchise while the List of Finding Nemo characters was redirected. To flash back, Collectionian had told OckhamTheFox and Marktreut that one film plus a direct-to-video sequel was far from enough for an article [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6].

Look, there isn't a need to discuss the edits or other editors here. Collectonian is, without question, one of this site's finest editors. Still, that isn't the point, so take a deep breath and relax. The link is here along with the e-mail address: Wikipedia:GAB#Banned_users. You're under a community ban, but your situation is unique and calls for higher-ups to make the decision in my opinion. This is your last, best chance. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:08, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I tried sending the email but I don't know who to send to. I think I did it wrong. I had to go to bed last night before I could finnish anyway. So now I'm confused. And soon I go to school, where the ip there is also globally blocked until August, so that block won't let me edit with an account either. LighteningHeroZero80 (talk) 11:58, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good question; it's more of a "to whom this may concern" general e-mail address. You don't have to log on here to send the e-mail. Just use your personal account when you have a moment. FYI, there was word on my talk page on another suspected sockpuppet of yours. Even if it isn't you, you can see the issues you've raised with other users. I'm sticking my neck out for you, so please do the right thing. If you get the OK to edit, I will help you. Remember: One bad-faith edit at that time means all bets are off. PMDrive1061 (talk) 22:49, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PS: That also applies to sockpuppets you might create between now and then. If you do create a sock, you're going to blow this chance, pure and simple. In short, DON'T. Wait until you get the permission. If you do, pick one account and one only. PMDrive1061 (talk) 23:01, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I can tell you I saw the edit to the talk page of The Great Mouse Detective. I don't know who it was, but it wasn't me even though I like that movie a lot. I know the plot summary is too long, but that short?! I was thinking "WTF!" when I saw that. I think it could be Pickbothmanlol or The abominable Wiki troll again. Remember I have a fan club; they even edited for me in Welsh! See http://cy.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arbennig:Contributions/Lala and http://cy.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arbennig:Contributions/Nobody. When I'm unbanned I think the Anatiomaros guy at the cy wiki should at least change the protection level on all those pages so that people who speak Welsh as well as bots can make edits. And I'm still not sure who I should email. But when and if they unban me I think I could edit as my original Bambifan101 account since it's not an sul. Then maybe I could ask Collectionian what to do about the Open Season characters article. LighteningHeroZero80 (talk) 23:14, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You may be right and I don't want to sling accusations, so we'll try and let that slide. If you'd like to reactivate the Bambifan101 account, that's no problem once you get the OK. Ditto working with Collectonian if she'll agree to do so. That e-mail address goes to no particular person as far as I know, so don't worry about that. PMDrive1061 (talk) 23:31, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Post me a url. Thanks for the help. And sorry about the meanie part. LighteningHeroZero80 (talk) 23:35, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem; we've both been swapping insults as of late.  :) It should be the url on the link I sent a couple of posts ago. Like I said, just use your personal e-mail account. I hope this works out; you may finally be maturing enough to start to take this seriously. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 23:41, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I saw it has arbcom-llists.wikimedia.org, however, I think I'm missing part of it like the "en." or "www.". And yes I know en stands for english as part of the iw setup. LighteningHeroZero80 (talk) 23:44, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds like it. It isn't a website but rather an e-mail address. I don't have time to post the address I wrote to - gotta go back to work - but I will, so stay tuned. PMDrive1061 (talk) 00:38, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Do you think McDoobAU93 could be overreacting about the Qwertyuiopqazplm user? He didn't even edit; it doesn't seem that big of a deal unless it is in fact my fan club, or maybe that dumb "Animoviera14" user that made me feel stupid. BTW, happy easter! I've been a little busy since yesterday, but I'll stay for the email address. LighteningHeroZero80 (talk) 17:57, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Easter to you too. There is a special "role account" at User:Arbitration Committee. Since your e-mail is active on this account, go to that link, click "E-mail this user," change the e-mail subject to something other than "Wikipedia mail" and go from there. I still haven't heard back from them, so give them time once you send the message. That proverbial ball is now in your court; good luck! --PMDrive1061 (talk) 15:05, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sent this message:

User:PMDRive1061 and I (Bambifan101) have started a disscussion about my ban. The agreement is that if it's ok, I can be unbanned to make useful edits. If I mess it up, I'm banned again.

Title is Ban of Bambifan101. LighteningHeroZero80 (talk) 19:31, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's a start. A bit short, but I'll follow up with a message of my own. You should have steered them toward this discussion, but at least you've taken the first step. PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:49, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Here's my follow-up e-mail as promised:

You should have received a request for unblocking from a user identified as "Bambifan101" over at Wikipedia. Our dialogue can be found at the following link:

http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User_talk:LighteningHeroZero80

This individual has been a rather prolific vandal for more than three years and, as you'll see, I took the time to alert Jimbo Wales to the problem.

However, during the course of our discussion, "Bambifan" is showing a willingness to reform his ways and become a useful editor. If the Committee decides to lift his community ban, it should be under close supervision with certain guidelines in place, among them no sockpuppet accounts, no vandalism whatsoever and no accounts outside the English Wikipedia.

This is a special case and I have beeen leading the fight against this user's vandalism up until now. If he is in fact prepared to become an editor in good standing, I am willing to help. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 02:14, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What's the status? LighteningHeroZero80 (talk) 22:57, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing yet. I'll let you know the moment I get an answer. Thank you for being patient and thank you for not creating any socks. Continue to stay cool and to do the right thing. It'll only help your case. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 17:21, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but no

[edit]

Based on the conversation at the noticeboard, it would seem as if you were still creating sockpuppets during this time. Once more, I tried...and you blew the chance. I honestly felt good at the chance of seeing you redeemed and learning about your continued bad behavior is a tremendous disappointment. Given your history, you're just too far gone for redemption at this point and there is no way I'm going to allow valuable editors quit this project over this. It is time for you to grow up, accept responsibility for your actions and simply move on. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:17, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, which sock is this about? En wiki or other wikis? I have tried to revert vandalism on the vi wiki and such on other wikis, is this still ban evasion? LighteningHeroZero80 (talk) 01:56, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Technically, yes...but according to the conversation at the admin noticeboard, you were apparently engaging in sockpuppeteering over here. It's as I said; your history is working against you and no one's willing to extend trust to you. You may well be sincere and in your mind, helping revert vandalism here or other projects is a good thing, but the conditions of your block/ban don't allow it. My suggestion at this point is to find a small wiki which caters to your interests and which isn't aligned with Wikipedia. There are any number of them out there on specialized subjects. Show that you can do good at a wiki like that. Stay off of all Wikipedia projects for a good six months and try again at that time. PMDrive1061 (talk) 02:37, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • This is the last straw. You not only created yet another sock over here, you did several more via your South Carolina IP. You are now done. I will be blocking the IP ranges for one year, I will be reopening my dialogue with Jimbo Wales and your talk page access is now revoked as well. Get the message and get lost. Go outside and ride a bike. Go fishing. Learn how to change spark plugs. Find some other way to draw attention to yourself; consider acting classes. Start a new hobby; go to Wal-Mart and pick up a model kit and some paints. Do something that does NOT involve a wiki. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 15:29, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:LighteningHeroZero80&oldid=1085843624"