User talk:Doughnuthead
Extended content
| |
|---|---|
 Doughnuthead (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log)) Request reason: Right, i dont find it necessary i remain blocked, i vow to change and make this place better for everyone. All that trolling did nobody a favour and only got me in trouble, so if i could get unblocked and ill be a productive editor? I no longer wish to be affilated with this account, i wish to be unblocked in order to make a new one. I accept that i did wrong in the past, but im prepared to set things straight and man up a bit. Decline reason: Giventhat you've been abusing multiple accounts recently, I see non reason to believe you. If you really mean it, you'll leave Wikipedia alone for at least 6 months, and then try again (and you may be told that it hadn't been enough time even then). עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:30, 12 December 2011 (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. Doughnuthead (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log)) Request reason: Yes, but ill stop abusing multiple accounts, create one new one to avoid my assosiation with this crap, and stick with that new account. No harm, no fuss. P.S. this is my school ip in case you think im skipping school. Decline reason: Getting unblocked is about convincing the community that future editing will be constructive. But at this time, I am nowhere near convinced that that is the case and that unblocking will be to the good of the project. I'd suggest waiting at least 6 months (as I doubt anyone is going to unblock so soon after such egregious socking), and then come back with a good explanation of what you plan to do here, which areas you wish to work in, and how you will be an asset to the project. No promises, but if you're genuine enough then you may be in with a shot of convincing an admin to unblock -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:29, 12 December 2011 (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. (Non-administrator comment) Why should you be unblocked in any way? Look here; it contains a list of ALL of the socks you created. Not one. Not two. Not three. but SEVENTEEN of them. I remembered patrolling the user account creation log when *pop* came the account "MuzemikeSucksDick". You also created another account called "Philosopherisadick". You are giving the community here, especially CheckUsers and administrators, a rough time, because we have to deal with you. We will not forgive you for any of the disruption you have caused to the encyclopedia. Please, never create another sockpuppet again on Wikipedia unless you are sure you can conduct yourself in a mature fashion. --Bryce (talk | contribs) 14:11, 12 December 2011 (UTC) Doughnuthead (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log)) Request reason: Oh my god... you are such a fool. I have much more than 17 other accounts. Theyve all been used in the exact same way but whether or not they actually exist is for your stupid checkuser to find out. I know this isnt the best time to brag but that was a really arrogant statement. Also i couldnt give a damn if you take this to SPI.--Doughnuthead (talk) 17:37, 12 December 2011 (UTC) Decline reason: Not a reason for unblock. Peridon (talk) 17:50, 12 December 2011 (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. My statement...was arrogant? I was pointing out facts about your behavior on this site. And by the way, you won't achieve anything by calling users "a fool" and calling checkusers "stupid". That's all I'm going to say, as I don't want to get near feeding the trolls. --Bryce (talk | contribs) 01:51, 13 December 2011 (UTC) Doughnuthead (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log)) Request reason: Thats strange, it says i got unblocked, but i remain unable to edit other pages? Also i remember, i have 20 other accounts i forgot the passwords for, and about 8 or 9 sleepers that are used in desparate emergencies. See if CU can deal with that, eh? Decline reason: Procedural decline, as there's no unblock request here -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:39, 12 December 2011 (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.
Sockpuppetry case
Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Doughnuthead for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:48, 29 December 2011 (UTC) |
ArbCom unblock appeal
The Arbitration Committee has carefully considered the user's appeal and has declined to unblock at this time. After six months of not editing Wikipedia under any account including IP accounts the user may again apply to have the block reviewed.
For the Arbitration Committee. SilkTork ✔Tea time 18:43, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.--RedBullWarrior (talk) 11:12, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
Community ban
Per WP:CBAN and AN/I community decision on 6 August 2012[1], you are hereby informed that you are permanently banned from editing any part of this website for any reason whatsoever. If you feel this ban is unjust, you may appeal your case to the Arbitration Committee by email. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 20:15, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
Doughnuthead (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Hello. To anybody who picks up on this request, this is indef-blocked User:Doughnuthead speaking. I firmly believe I can finally be of positive use to Wikipedia, and I no longer feel the need to gain attention through malicious editing. I'd actually all but forgotten about all the nonsense i had caused in the previous years until i saw a funny picture online of a guy with a swollen head, which reminded me of my username. But more to the point, i realised that my ability to edit the talk page was barred. After taking a look at previous edits, i realised i was being a bit of a tube. You were right to take that ability away. So just a heads up that i can only edit on anon as this account is obviously still suspended. In terms of getting unblocked, i haven't made a single edit to Wikipedia in almost 3 years, and during this time i have matured enough to the point that i look back at what i was getting up to and think 'Oh god! Who was i even trying to impress?!' In terms of where i aim to get involved in on the website, I still hold a strong interest in football (soccer) related articles, along with hip-hop and old school rock related articles- hence my music taste. As it has been so long since I bothered to use the editing facility, I'll need re-shown how to work various parts of the site or whatever it's called. I only remembered how to request unblock by clicking on the 'edit' tab and noticing one of my old templates! Furthermore, I don't intend to be an overly active user on the site, as I begin my university course in September much of my time will be dedicated towards my studies, and so I intend to see Wikipedia as a hobby to input my thoughts and research every now and then. Finally, thank you very much to whoever reads my request - I appreciate the time taken to do so and I apologise for my past behaviour. I was just a stupid kid (it lasted from age 12-15 if I recall!) and I hope to hear from someone as soon as possible,--89.243.205.141 (talk) 13:32, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Decline reason:
You are banned form editing Wikipedia, which means that this appeal is in iteslf a violation of your ban (and by rights, I should just delete it rather than responding). However, people can change a lot in two years, and I for one would be minded to consider an appeal through the proper channels. In this case, the channel is the Ban Appeals Subcommittee; please email the committee with your appeal, and we will consider it. Yunshui 雲水 13:54, 20 May 2015 (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.
Doughnuthead (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Hello. Yes I am aware this is rather unorthodox, but I see no other way to stay informed. I applied directly to ArbCom a little over a month ago to be unblocked/unbanned but have yet to recieve a response. Although I was told my request would be responded to 'within a few weeks' I feel time is just dragging on too long. This isn't exactly a request to be unblocked, but i'd rather just gain some consensus as to whether I can have an appeal accepted at a community level.--80.44.68.69 (talk) 00:09, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
Decline reason:
No. Please be patient. Huon (talk) 01:00, 23 June 2015 (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.
Yeah man, I agree, this use should be unblocked. 70.128.116.200 (talk) 00:46, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
Unban request
This edit requested an unban. It used the unblock template, despite the fact you know your only avenue for unbanning is WP:BASC. However, as the unblock request was made by an IP address rather than someone signed in to this account, I have simply blanked it. Any further instances will result in this page being protected, though. --Yamla (talk) 15:10, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
- This page has now been protected to prevent any further instances. --Yamla (talk) 15:20, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
- The IP user, claiming to be Doughnuthead, continued to be abusive on their IP talk page and I had to revoke talk page access. If this really was Doughnuthead, they continue to show it would be breathtakingly inappropriate to lift the ban. --Yamla (talk) 15:42, 6 December 2016 (UTC)