User talk:Copyright Troll

Your username

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. I just wanted to mention that the username you have selected is probably not very conducive to editing and working with other users. Given the seriousness with which Wikipedia treats copyright and the use of the word troll, there will be many people who will keep a very close eye on your edits, and who may have a problem with the username as it currently is regardless of your editing. I do release that you may have meant it as a joke, but there will be many people who don't see it that way.

My suggestion would be that you either create a new account (and if you do I can help with redirecting this account to that one) or request that your username be changed (see WP:CHU) if you want the edits of this account to be recorded under your new username. I'm happy to discuss this further with you if you'd like, I'll keep an eye on this page so leave any messages under this. Regards, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:52, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

thank you for your suggestion. i am going to keep the name because i think that it is funny. What does a name have to do with the quality of edits? If someone is going to stalk someone on Wikipedia on account of a name, than they probably have too much time on their hands. having the best name in the world is absolutely no guarantee of quality work. I look at your name and I have no clue as to what it means. But it could be something very funny to you. No one here is in charge of anyone else, and we all get paid the same for the editing we do. This is supposed to be fun. i am trying to have fun by doing my part to poke fun at people who act like jerks. If i act like a troll, than by all means punish me. But I am sure there are plenty of people with other kinds of name who act like the biggest jerks in the world. Anyways, it is cool to have met you. Copyright Troll (talk) 06:47, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What I meant was that your edits will be scrutinised much more than other peoples', as the username is one of the things we look at when deciding whether or not check edits (I'm referring to Special:RecentChanges). I thought that may have been the reason, but I wanted to let you know anyway. Yeah there are some jerks with all kinds of username. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:06, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I do not understand why a person's name would subject them to extra scrutiny. I think it makes sense to watch the new editors in case they need help or are just wanting to mess things up. But if I see your name and think, "I need to watch this person extra hard because I don't like their name" that seems pretty strange and wasteful to me. Copyright Troll (talk) 07:09, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

October 2012

Please do not attack other editors, as you did to Streisand effect. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. ⁓ Hello 71 00:52, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The dude is a jerk just trying to push his weight around and making up "rules" as he goes along. I've no tolerance for that. Play nice or go home, is that I say.

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. ⁓ Hello 71 00:53, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Streisand effect shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. — UncleBubba ^{( T @ C )} 01:16, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So how about you block the jerk who started this bullshit to begin with, or would that be too much like work?

If, after you are unblocked, you want to discuss making this change to the Streisand_effect article, please do so on the article's Talk page, first. Thank you. — UncleBubba ^{( T @ C )} 03:04, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. — UncleBubba ^{( T @ C )} 01:58, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a short time for your disruption caused by edit warring and violation of the three-revert rule at Streisand effect. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Acroterion (talk) 02:08, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, I'm concerned about your attitude toward other editors, and your username, combined with that attitude, is of concern. Acroterion (talk) 02:10, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Talk:KA-BAR, you may be blocked from editing.

Despite your username, don't troll on talkpages. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:54, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions. Please remember to mark your edits, such as your recent edits to Jones_v._Dirty_World_Entertainment_Recordings_LLC, as "minor" only if they truly are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes, or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. — UncleBubba ^{( T @ C )} 21:03, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

unblock request

{{unblock-auto|1=68.3.59.73|2=Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "Copyright Troll". The reason given for Copyright Troll's block is: "Abusing multiple accounts: Please see: [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet invest|3=Berean Hunter|4=4159866}} I am NOT a sock puppet!!! I request that a check user be done to prove this is not true! Regarding the Harvey Levin edit, Levin was on TMZ during Veterans Day and he discussed his air force service at length. I went to his article to add this information when i saw that someone had already added it once before. So I just used the information that they had used by copy & pasting it since it was what i would have said anyways. The "evidence" presented by BB23 is not even evidence! By the way, the abbreviation for California is CA. That is the abbreviation that EVERYBODY in the United States uses and every American would know this - all 330 million of us. But I guess they are all sock puppets, too, BB23. So it is not something "unique" to a sock puppet. Beran Hunter never gave me an opportunity to respond. Guess that is not good faith on his part. Nice to see how friendly and helpful everyone here is. not. And to say that I am a sock puppet because I use abbreviations common to texters is bogus. plz. Use a check user. Assume good faith like you claim. Do an investigation and show me the evidence. If you have none, just be a man and admit it.

unblock me 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).

Copyright Troll (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 puppet!!! I request that a check user be done to prove this is not true! Regarding the Harvey Levin edit, Levin was on TMZ during Veterans Day and he discussed his air force service at length. I went to his article to add this information when i saw that someone had already added it once before. So I just used the information that they had used by copy & pasting it since it was what i would have said anyways. By the way, the abbreviation for California is CA. That is the abbreviation that EVERYBODY in the United States uses and every American would know this. So it is not something "unique" to a sock puppet. Beran Hunter never gave me an opportunity to respond. Guess that is not good faith on his part. Nice to see how friendly and helpful everyone here is. not.

Decline reason:

You were provided with the opportunity to read WP:GAB, and show the community that you were prepared to be a useful and valuable member of the Wikipedia community. Instead, you're attacking others, biting with sarcasm, and displaying personal behaviours in this unblock that are entirely unwelcome on Wikipedia. I recommend you take a few days to actually consider what being a part of a community means before re-requesting an unblock. Study WP:GAB thoroughly. Remind yourself that telling someone to "be a man" is not conducive to working together (✉→BWilkins←✎) 10:29, 20 November 2012 (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.