User talk:Gatorphat

Welcome

I rarely use templates and I'm not Jimbo Wales, but I hope you feel welcome here at Wikipedia. Check in with me sometime if you have a question. My time's spread pretty thin (I'm a busy sysop) but something made me smile when I saw your request for a greeting. And BTW it takes a bit more than one month to become an admin, but if you'd like I could become your coach. Cheers, Durova^Charge! 04:19, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

I am afraid that I am not Jimbo either, but I am an admin and would be delighted to send you our welcome page. Jimbo tends not to take an active role in wiki at this level, although he does keep his finger firmly on the pulse.

Welcome!

Hello, Gatorphat, 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:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! --Anthony.bradbury 21:43, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

I'm not Jimbo either, and I don't play him on TV, but welcome, anyway. *Dan T.* 22:24, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stop it

It's too lame for words. Go play somewhere else. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 04:00, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for a week, and your sock blocked indefinately. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 04:54, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for adminship

Trolling requests for adminship does not aid in the consensus-building process, so I'm going to have to ask you to not do it again. Thank you for understanding. Picaroon (Talk) 02:05, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looking through your past contributions it seems you are only here to troll. For this reason,

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for repeated abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

Krimpet (talk) 02:41, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

I have not wandalised anything man

Decline reason:

Lack of language skills besides 'Engrish'? You're trolling not long after receiving your first block for it. Try doing something constructive. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 02:56, 12 May 2007 (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.

Year and decade moves reversed

I've reversed your moves of 985 and 970s, those are our year and decade naming conventions, moving just one of each isn't a good idea. Misspelling "Decade" didn't help either. --AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 20:34, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

July 2007

Please do not use talk pages such as Talk:A Year in the Merde for general discussion of the topic. They are for discussion related to improving the article. They are not to be used as a forum or chat room. See here for more information. Thank you. Sancho 01:15, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

What did i do i believe any review of my contributions will show their sterling quality

Decline reason:

This absurd, frivolous, and groundless legal notice is by no means to the rational mind "sterling." — Kurykh 23:10, 7 July 2007 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

I want a real admin to decide

Decline reason:

I agree with the assessment of the blocking administrator. Btw, Kurykh is a real admin. — Sancho 23:44, 7 July 2007 (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.

(woops, double reviewed... oh well)

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).

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

Request reason:

I want a real admin to decide

Decline reason:

Kurykh is a real admin. Since you refuse to acknowledge the problem I have confidence that you will continue your inappropriate behavior. — ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 23:57, 7 July 2007 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

I object, I was not given any notice of this blocking

Decline reason:

Nowhere in policy is notice required. — ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 00:00, 8 July 2007 (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.

unblock | This is simply unfair. I am going straight to the Jimbo Wallis.}}

I am now locking this page per abuse of the unblock tag. Please see WP:UNBLOCK for further options in requesting unblocking. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 01:53, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]