User talk:Gsnviewer

An editor has expressed a concern that this account may be a sockpuppet of Nyannrunning (talk · contribs · logs).
Please refer to the sockpuppet investigation of the sockpuppeteer, and editing habits or contributions of the sockpuppet for evidence. This policy subsection may be helpful.

Account information: block log – contribs – logs – abuse log – CentralAuth

See: Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Nyannrunning, Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Dooyar, Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Nyannrunning, Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Nyannrunning (2nd), Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Nyannrunning (3rd) for checks and comparison of editing history and patterns of writing and interests and block history. Also see What's My Line? history for contributions and similarity in writing styles. LaVidaLoca (talk) 00:11, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am a dedicated viewer of GSN. You are confusing me with someone who is interested in all those people who aren't shown on GSN. I use the computer at a public library. Maybe these facts are leading you down the wrong path. At any rate, I am upset by GSN's decision to discontinue What's My Line?. I am dealing with my grief by proposing a change to this article. If you keep hurling this accusation at me, please do it through a mediator. I'm going to restore my proposal to the Discussion page. Please leave it alone. Thank you. Gsnviewer (talk) 19:33, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Posts by banned sock puppets are to be immediately removed. Yes, you are posting from a public library in the Los Angeles area, you are intently interested in What's My Line? and have made postings on the article before and many others, you are writing in a distinct style that has previously been determined to be particular to the banned sock puppet, you are making similar statements and protests as you did with prior sock accounts ("Unless you know someone who has saved an episode on Tivo, a DVR or an MP4 player, then the show will exist in your imagination only (come March 31)." posted here as compared to your IMDb posting here.) Debbiesvoucher, Nyannrunning, Dooyar, Evanbayh, Newcastlein, Seth4u2nvcs, whoever you are this time, it doesn't take a huge effort to determine this anymore. We revert your posts on sight. 20:50, 27 February 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by LaVidaLoca (talk • contribs)

I am the only person "intently interested in What's My Line?? GSN is showing repeats daily for the next month. Do you understand advertising dollars? Companies that buy advertising time for the reruns would be interested to know I'm the only viewer who is "intently interested." Am I also the only nostalgia buff who knows what an MP4 player is? If I am, the Sony Corporation would be interested to hear about that. Whoever you are, please take your case to a senior editor for arbitration. I am going to keep this up until someone agrees to discuss the issue at hand, which is the importance of GSN to What's My Line?. Should GSN be included in the article? Gsnviewer (talk) 22:20, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Advertising dollars and MP4 players have absolutely nothing to do with this issue. There are no "senior editors" on Wikipedia, which you also know. Sock puppet issues are not subject to arbitration procedures. You are a banned sock puppet. The sock case has already been determined. Edits by banned sock puppets and sock masters are to be reverted on sight, regardless of the relevance or content. Keep writing, Debbiesvoucher/Nyannrunning/Dooyar/Evanbayh/Newcastlein/Seth4u2nvcs/Onittles, each time, you only add more confirmation to the argument. Your tangential writing style is obvious. You went away for a long time, it was a wise choice. LaVidaLoca (talk) 22:42, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me, ma'am, sir or whoever you are? I am not the person you are labeling me as. I never went on a tangent. My reference to "advertising dollars" was right on your topic of me supposedly being the only person "intently interested" in What's My Line?. I notice you at least have stopped removing my comments from that show's discussion page. You are leaving alone my discussion about Ed McGlasson. Let's give people a few days to reply to them.

No, I don't know the exact term for people with more experience in Wikipedia than you. They do exist, so I'm going to keep this up until one of them adds some much needed insight on your weird statements. Now then, what can you tell us (I'm assuming we aren't the only people reading this) about the importance of GSN to What's My Line?? The reruns will cease soon, so maybe the article needs to acknowledge that they lasted for 14 years.Gsnviewer (talk) 22:53, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Article and talk page edits on pages other than this by banned sock puppets are reverted on sight. No days are allotted for people to respond to banned sock puppets on those pages. The sock case was determined. Does this account need to be permanently blocked too? There are other editors who make the determinations that you want. It's notable that no one has bothered to address the end of the reruns as of yet and you have posted on IMDb about it as well, using the same arguments and rationales as you do here. Apparently the GSN isn't happy with their advertising revenue from the reruns, they are stopping them. I will make no further response to your other comments, they don't exist for a sock puppet. LaVidaLoca (talk) 23:06, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for allowing me to make my comment on the What's My Line? discussion page even though you're making no further response. You are right, I'm the one making every single IMDb post about GSN's decision. I'm the only What's My Line? fan with enough brain cells to type comments on user-driven web sites. Thanks again for your tolerance of my apparent monopoly on the comments. Gsnviewer (talk) 23:17, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The link to your comment as cindytrells on IMDb is linked above, which show the similarities in writing style as to this one. Also your use of the the term "user-driven web sites" is something you've used before and originated in one of your earlier accounts here. Postings by banned sock puppets are to be reverted on sight. LaVidaLoca (talk) 23:52, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You replied after all. That's your choice. Writing style? This isn't a college literature course. It's an article about a dead TV game show. It's an article about an NFL offensive lineman who retired many, many years ago. I haven't changed either article. I've proposed changes, that's all. Please give me my First Amendment rights. If I change any articles, then you can act. They are community property. Gsnviewer (talk) 19:10, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't be obtuse. As a banned sock puppet account, You are not permitted to edit any pages, it doesn't matter if it is an article or a talk page. All edits by banned sock puppets are to be reverted on sight. If you choose to continue, your ability to even edit this talk page will likely be permanently protected to remove the temptation. LaVidaLoca (talk) 23:26, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When an editor has been blocked and banned indefinitely, that editor is no longer permitted to make any entries at all, either on articles or article talk pages. All edits by a banned sock puppet are to be reverted on sight. Wikipedia is not the United States of America and rights such as you claim to have are not applicable here. Wikipedia is a privately owned site that sets its own limitations on rights and privileges. Editing on Wikipedia is not a right, it is a privilege that can be revoked with persistent policy violations, such as occurred to you and the multitude of identities that were confirmed and related to you. Once you're banned it is akin to saying "Go away, your edits are no longer wanted."

See WP:BAN: Statements pertinent to you would include

Wikipedia's hope for banned users is that they will leave Wikipedia or the affected area with their pride and dignity intact, whether permanently or for the duration of their ban.
Anyone is free to revert any edits made in defiance of a ban. By banning a user, the community has decided that their edits are prima facie unwanted and may be reverted without any further reason.
Banned users' user pages may be replaced by a notice of the ban and links to any applicable discussion or decision-making pages. The purpose of this notice is to announce the ban to editors encountering the banned user's edits. Unlike editors who have been temporarily blocked, banned users are not permitted to edit their user and user talk pages.
Banned or blocked users sometimes return to Wikipedia using another user name. Obvious reincarnations are easily dealt with—the account is blocked and contributions are reverted or deleted, as discussed above. LaVidaLoca (talk) 01:53, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You don't really want a sock puppet investigation opened. Your current account will be permanently blocked and any IPs you've used to connect to Wikipedia will be blocked. Don't play this game, you can't win, you've been blocked HOW many time before?? Your posting was up for a few hours, no one replied. The only ones who might are aware you're a sock and won't reply. Give it up. LaVidaLoca (talk) 03:37, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

March 2009

This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive conduct.
The next time you make a personal attack as you did at Talk:What's My Line?, you will be blocked for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. An edit summary like this: "Do you even know what you're saying? "Nyannrunning" or whatever. You might not even know what you're saying, like a stroke victim" is a personal attack which will not be tolerated. Perhaps it is time to open a sock puppet investigation, which appears to have gotten you permanently banned. It would be better for all concerned if you just quietly slip away before your access is again blocked. Wildhartlivie (talk) 01:28, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

April 2009

Your question on Talk:What's My Line? was answered before you asked it. It isn't the Game Show Network page, it is the What's My Line? page. As I said before, you really don't want a sock puppet investigation opened. Your current account will be permanently blocked and any IPs you've used to connect to Wikipedia will be blocked. Don't play this game, you can't win, you've been blocked HOW many time before?? As Debbiesvoucher, as Dooyar, as Nyannrunning, as Evanbayh, as Seth4u2nvcs, as Newcastleind. You've become an annoyance, one that Wikipedia has soundly told to go away and don't come back. A new sock investigation will render your LA public library connection blocked, your friend's computer connection blocked, the LA airport connection blocked, the UCLA connection blocked. The next time you're blocked, investigation will be turned over to management of any facitilities that you use, along with time codes and tracking and could get you banned from using the computers in those locations. There comes a point when it is easier to ban the person from the premises. Don't make that happen. Just go away. LaVidaLoca (talk) 00:55, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]