Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mooretwin (talk | contribs) at 21:20, 18 January 2009 (→Recycling in Ireland). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This user comes from the United States of America.

This user lives in the United States District of Columbia.

Your victory inspires us. Things that seemed impossible become feasible.

Toponymy of Ireland

Could you clarify who you mean by "you" in your comment? I think you mean User:MinisterForBadTimes rather than me, but it's not clear - there was an edit conflict. Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:05, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes it was Ministerforbadtimes sorry.OBO7 11:06, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Blocked as a sockpuppet You have been blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet of Wikipéire (talk · contribs · global contribs · page moves · user creation · block log). Blocked or banned users are not allowed to edit Misplaced Pages; if you are banned, all edits under this account may be reverted. Further comments: Checkuser block - Alison 20:41, 17 January 2009 (UTC) Details of how to appeal a block can be found at: Misplaced Pages:Appealing a block.

Template:Do not delete

OBO7 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Not this again! There was a problem with this before when I first registered. Apparently my edits match this editor. A checkuser was done and proved I was innocent. Please look at this diff here showing that it was a mistake http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:OBO7&diff=260886131&oldid=260826883. This mistake was made last time and has been made again. A checkuser was done and it was found I was not this Wikipiere editor. You can read what happened last time here: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:OBO7&diff=262947631&oldid=262947588 Can I be unblocked please so I can get back to editing? Thanks

Decline reason:

Per Alison, without prejudice to another request if another Checkuser is done. — Daniel Case (talk) 21:51, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

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.

• Actually, I'd read that before I blocked your account, Wikipéire. Also, one of your IPs links you to your User:Xavierized account. Even further, you're logging out extensively to edit-war on certain articles, where people have already ID'd the IP edits as Wikipéire, co-incidentally. There is plenty of technical evidence to back this up and I certainly welcome a second checkuser, if necessary - Alison 20:52, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

OBO7 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

No need to do a second checkuser, you got me. I would have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for you meddling kids! :) This here is more a proposal than your normal unblock request and is probably meant for Alison or someone higher up, not your Joe Bloggs administrator who's not aware of the whole story to decide. Normally after a blocking I would go on and setup a new account to edit from, for example I nearly got a whole month out of this one. It works grand for me and if you want to keep me blocked I can continue like that but here is an idea which I think benefits everyone and the project. You unblock an account of mine, if I sock again I become banned completely, all my edits are instantly reverted etc. so it becomes pointless for me to edit. Either this one or the Wikipéire account would be good candidates (you could probably scrutinize my edits easier under the Wikip account.) All the other normal potential blocks would still apply but I would become banned if I socked again once unblocked (you can checkuser or whatever.)I look forward to hearing what you think.

Decline reason:

You are already de facto banned as Wikipéire (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), and you do not provide any reason why that block should be lifted (except by threatening more socking, which is a very good reason to keep the ban in place). Lying about your identity, above, is also not a good way to regain our trust. —  Sandstein  11:00, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

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.

OBO7 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Blocking administrator: Alison (talk)

Reviewing administrator: -- lucasbfr 11:17, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Request reason:

After the blocking administrator has left a comment, do one of the following:

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with any specific rationale. If you do not edit the text after "decline=", a default reason why the request was declined will be inserted.

{{unblock reviewed|1=No need to do a second checkuser, you got me. I would have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for you meddling kids! :) This here is more a proposal than your normal unblock request and is probably meant for Alison or someone higher up, not your Joe Bloggs administrator who's not aware of the whole story to decide. Normally after a blocking I would go on and setup a new account to edit from, for example I nearly got a whole month out of this one. It works grand for me and if you want to keep me blocked I can continue like that but here is an idea which I think benefits everyone and the project. Ultimately lifting the block will let everyone move on. You unblock an account of mine, if I sock again I become banned completely, all my edits are instantly reverted etc. so it becomes pointless for me to edit. Either this one or the Wikipéire account would be good candidates (you could probably scrutinize my edits easier under the Wikip account.) All the other normal potential blocks would still apply but I would become banned if I socked again once unblocked (you can checkuser or whatever.)I look forward to hearing what you think. (Please take note of comment below)|decline={{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed|1=No need to do a second checkuser, you got me. I would have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for you meddling kids! :) This here is more a proposal than your normal unblock request and is probably meant for Alison or someone higher up, not your Joe Bloggs administrator who's not aware of the whole story to decide. Normally after a blocking I would go on and setup a new account to edit from, for example I nearly got a whole month out of this one. It works grand for me and if you want to keep me blocked I can continue like that but here is an idea which I think benefits everyone and the project. Ultimately lifting the block will let everyone move on. You unblock an account of mine, if I sock again I become banned completely, all my edits are instantly reverted etc. so it becomes pointless for me to edit. Either this one or the Wikipéire account would be good candidates (you could probably scrutinize my edits easier under the Wikip account.) All the other normal potential blocks would still apply but I would become banned if I socked again once unblocked (you can checkuser or whatever.)I look forward to hearing what you think. (Please take note of comment below)|accept=Accept reason here ~~~~}}

I asked for Alison or someone similar to think about the unblock request not an admin whose naturally, unaware of the whole story (though any insight of how this whole thing could proceed successfully is appreciated). For example you rejected it straight away without asking any questions or negotiations. This is a chance for the socking to be stopped, an instant refusal like was done above isn't going to help anyone. Please wait for someone with a familiar idea of my edit and account history before making any judgement on whether to unblock me or not. Any questions for me, ask, please don't refuse the block until it is decided that it is the final decision amongst the people involved. OBO7 11:13, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Recycling in Ireland

Why are you opposing my edits on this article. The article relates only to the Republic of Ireland and therefore the title is misleading. If the title is to stay, then at least the opening line needs to clarify that the article does not relate to the whole island. (Also, it takes two to edit-war.) Mooretwin (talk) 21:19, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages sockpuppets of Wikipéire
• Misplaced Pages sockpuppets
• Unblock on hold