Krazy - warning on 3RR |
No edit summary |
||
Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
::Be careful of [[Wikipedia:Three-revert rule]] which you have just violated. Why do you think a recent song, which only reached #30, would be more notable and more likely to be the target of a search than any other use of "Krazy", in particular a well-remembered UK comic or any other possible meanings that I added to the disambiguation article? I think you are incorrect. [[User:Stephenb|Stephenb]] [[User talk:Stephenb|(Talk)]] 10:04, 20 October 2008 (UTC) |
::Be careful of [[Wikipedia:Three-revert rule]] which you have just violated. Why do you think a recent song, which only reached #30, would be more notable and more likely to be the target of a search than any other use of "Krazy", in particular a well-remembered UK comic or any other possible meanings that I added to the disambiguation article? I think you are incorrect. [[User:Stephenb|Stephenb]] [[User talk:Stephenb|(Talk)]] 10:04, 20 October 2008 (UTC) |
||
==SheffieldSteel== |
|||
You say quote: ''"The circumstances surrounding the checkuser request cannot be used to argue that the CU findings are somehow inadmissable evidence (Wikipedia isn't a courtroom drama). According to the Checkuser, this account is one of several that has been used to avoid scrutiny, so an indefinite block seems quite appropriate."''. Why do you even say this? I was not arguing it to be inadmissable evidence, I was arguing that they did not find me to be abusing multiple accounts, commiting sockpuppetry and avoiding scrutiny. I have already mentioned this over and over on almost every single talkpage of my accounts now, so I will quote myself. ''"These appear to be multiple accounts being used to avoid scrutiny" is completely unfounded and was probably made by the checkuser admin as a thin veil for doing a checkuser from another admin who was in a debate with me just fishing and did not provide any diffs! I already addressed this in my comment towards Nixeagle who was the one who effectively banned me "They all focus on different areas of wikipedia and different article spaces and are in no way used to avoid scrutiny and their edits combined would not be considered improper if done by a single account!".'' Then again I said this: ''No, I'm sorry, but no. Checkuser did not show this at all and you are breaking policy repeatedly saying it did. It says pressumably by the check user "These appear to be multiple accounts being used to avoid scrutiny" with absolutely no diffs or evidence and was most likely used as a thin veil for wrongly performing a checkuser by a user whom was fishing. "They all focus on different areas of wikipedia and different article spaces and are in no way used to avoid scrutiny and their edits combined would not be considered improper if done by a single account!"''. |
|||
And then you say ''"While it's possible for the master account to be unblocked, I don't think it reasonable to unblock one of the sock accounts based on whether or not the master should have been blocked"''. My response to that is I want El Machete unblocked as that what I am using my unblock request under, and then automatically when that is unblocked and it is found I have not used my accounts abusively, the others would be unblocked. |
|||
You have also now made me come to this account because I am no longer able to defend myself on my other account as you protected it due to the edit war I was having with Daedalus969. Why couldn't you just follow my request and block him though? He has made more than 40 reverts on another page and he has made probably just as many if not more on Polystyla. Is it because he came to your page and you listened to him instead of me? El Machete Guerrero |
Revision as of 14:33, 23 March 2009
Welcome!
Hello, Xcahv8, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- Tutorial
- How to edit a page
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}}
before the question. Again, welcome! Manticore (talk) 03:06, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
Krazy
Hello. By changing this page to redirect to the song Krazy (song) you broke a number of wikilinks from several other pages which I have now corrected - for instance, see here. I have also changed Krazy to be a more useful disambiguation page, since I believe it is just as likely for someone searching for Krazy, or linking to Krazy, to be referring to other instances (I note there is also a song by "BlackGirls" called "Krazy" for example). So, in future, after moving an article please check the "What links here" link in the toolbox on the left and then fix up those links. Thanks! Stephenb (Talk) 09:10, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
- Reverted per WP:RECENT Stephenb (Talk) 09:38, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
- Be careful of Wikipedia:Three-revert rule which you have just violated. Why do you think a recent song, which only reached #30, would be more notable and more likely to be the target of a search than any other use of "Krazy", in particular a well-remembered UK comic or any other possible meanings that I added to the disambiguation article? I think you are incorrect. Stephenb (Talk) 10:04, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
SheffieldSteel
You say quote: "The circumstances surrounding the checkuser request cannot be used to argue that the CU findings are somehow inadmissable evidence (Wikipedia isn't a courtroom drama). According to the Checkuser, this account is one of several that has been used to avoid scrutiny, so an indefinite block seems quite appropriate.". Why do you even say this? I was not arguing it to be inadmissable evidence, I was arguing that they did not find me to be abusing multiple accounts, commiting sockpuppetry and avoiding scrutiny. I have already mentioned this over and over on almost every single talkpage of my accounts now, so I will quote myself. "These appear to be multiple accounts being used to avoid scrutiny" is completely unfounded and was probably made by the checkuser admin as a thin veil for doing a checkuser from another admin who was in a debate with me just fishing and did not provide any diffs! I already addressed this in my comment towards Nixeagle who was the one who effectively banned me "They all focus on different areas of wikipedia and different article spaces and are in no way used to avoid scrutiny and their edits combined would not be considered improper if done by a single account!". Then again I said this: No, I'm sorry, but no. Checkuser did not show this at all and you are breaking policy repeatedly saying it did. It says pressumably by the check user "These appear to be multiple accounts being used to avoid scrutiny" with absolutely no diffs or evidence and was most likely used as a thin veil for wrongly performing a checkuser by a user whom was fishing. "They all focus on different areas of wikipedia and different article spaces and are in no way used to avoid scrutiny and their edits combined would not be considered improper if done by a single account!".
And then you say "While it's possible for the master account to be unblocked, I don't think it reasonable to unblock one of the sock accounts based on whether or not the master should have been blocked". My response to that is I want El Machete unblocked as that what I am using my unblock request under, and then automatically when that is unblocked and it is found I have not used my accounts abusively, the others would be unblocked.
You have also now made me come to this account because I am no longer able to defend myself on my other account as you protected it due to the edit war I was having with Daedalus969. Why couldn't you just follow my request and block him though? He has made more than 40 reverts on another page and he has made probably just as many if not more on Polystyla. Is it because he came to your page and you listened to him instead of me? El Machete Guerrero