User talk:Orangegatosays22

September 2022

Hello, I'm Oopsemoops. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to The Imperfects have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. — Moops ^⋠T⋡ 19:27, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I don’t understand how it was not constructive? He is an actor in that show who appears in at least 4 of the 10 episodes. He is listed on IMBD. Thanks. Orangegatosays22 (talk) 19:29, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User:Oopsemoops the character of Nate Lang is in 3 episodes and they are listed under characters. Trying to understand how the character of PJ does fit. Thanks again. Orangegatosays22 (talk) 19:34, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If my revert was in error, please carry on and revert my edit. My apologies. TY. — Moops ^⋠T⋡ 19:36, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'd add that if you use RS's (reliable sources), then such reverts will always be least likely. TY. — Moops ^⋠T⋡ 19:36, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is IMDB not considered a reliable source? Thanks for the insight. Orangegatosays22 (talk) 19:38, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Here's another insight: stop socking. And before you barge in to some place, know the rules. This is just silly. User:Oopsemoops, you've been had: see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sunshine773. Drmies (talk) 22:47, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- How is this fair? There is no arbitration or chance to clarify anything or for me to ask questions. I don't even understand what is happening. How did I get roped into this? I'm not allowed to edit a number? The rules seem unevenly applied and with extreme prejudice. Orangegatosays22 (talk) 22:58, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- And from what I can see and understand of the sockpuppet logs, your punishment is especially cruel and unusual. It seems most cases get a ban from a certain page or they get blocked temporarily. You just constantly hand out indefinite blocks for absolutely everything. Your page says you've blocked something crazy like 26,000 people. That's super dictator like. Good lord why is Wikipedia so nasty. I didn't even do anything. I live in an apartment and you're probably picking up something else but don't even give people a chance to address. Orangegatosays22 (talk) 23:04, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

Drmies (talk) 22:47, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What is happening? Orangegatosays22 (talk) 22:48, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well, after a combined 95 edits on your three accounts, you could have figured this out. The whole "I don't know what's happening!" thing is a bit...immature. There's nothing "cruel" here--you're not even being punished. You just can't play on our website anymore because you refused to play by the rules. And over what? Some Rotten Tomatoes thing? Drmies (talk) 00:01, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I live in an apartment building with tons of other people with central WiFi service provided by the main office. Again, I don't know how I got roped into this. You all are like the Wikipedia gestapo. I wasn't harassing anyone or vandalising articles. I made a few edits on a couple of pages about a film that's in the news because it's about to come out and a television show that just premiered. Current relevant topics. What's immature is not even having the opportunity to address questions or you disparaging me publicly. The punishment is clearly unfair as many other socketpuppet cases received bans from specific pages or a temporary block, not an indefinite block. You are abusing your power and role here tremendously. 26,000 blocked people by a single person! That's immense abuse of a community run system. This is Wikipedia, not the FBI. Orangegatosays22 (talk) 00:45, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I also see you just blocked 4 people in under 13 minutes for vandalism. But they only got a 31 hour ban. Talk about unequitable justice. Other sockpuppet cases on that page receive fair less punishment than an indefinite block like me for a situation I still don't know how I fit into. I guess group apartment wifi means screw you. I had no idea Wikipedia was run by a group of tyrants. Your punishment is arbitrary and greatly imbalanced. It's super concerning that a single user has blocked nearly 27,000 users singlehandedly. On to bigger things! Orangegatosays22 (talk) 00:59, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]