User talk:KingPuppy

Welcome!

Hello, KingPuppy, 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 messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username 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}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Thanks for putting a speedy deletion tag on my mistakenly created page, you beat me to it. henrik•talk 15:10, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apology (moved from User page)

Yes, the accusations are true. I am Bugman94. I am writing this to say I am sorry for what I have done in my history. I operated a lot of socks these past couple of years, and at first all I wanted to do was vandalize. But now I've grown to love Wikipedia and its members. I am writing this to say I am sorry and would like a second chance. I plan on socking no more. I have to admit, I sock because I can't stay away. My recent socks have not been vandals and my edits if vandalism have not been intentional. Some of the socks on my comfirmed sock page are actually not me. Although a bunch are. In conclusion, and to sum this up, I wish to apoligize to the community. Thank you for having this valuable resource and I am sorry for what I have done in the past. Please, find it in your hearts to forgive me. KingPuppy 23:13, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Blocked

I've blocked this account as it is a self admitted sock account. You are not just blocked, you are banned from the project. If you wish to appeal this, please email the arbitration committee. Ryan Postlethwaite 00:09, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Better luck next time

Apparently, the whole honesty/asking for forgiveness route doesn't work around here. Next time, just create a new account and no one will ever know you are a sock if you are a productive editor and you forgo your past vandalisms. I assure you that people do it all the time and get away with it. Good luck! -- Kendrick7^talk 00:41, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

Please! Is there no trust? I promise! Please! I want to be loyal! At least let me participate in the WP:ANI discussion? KingPuppy 00:45, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

If you wish to participate in Wikipedia, you must appeal the banning of User:Bugman94 to the Arbitration COmmittee via email (see the big red box in the middle with the email?), as there is currently no consensus to unban you by the community. Daniel 02:40, 12 November 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.

Note to closing admin

This kid has been blocked for admitting to past bad behavior and asking for a second chance here. The admin who reblocked him as no idea as to the history of the original indef block. -- Kendrick7^talk 00:56, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I do, I've blocked socks of his previously, around a month ago if I recall. Banned users aren't allowed to edit. Ryan Postlethwaite 00:59, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look at Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Bugman94 for a brief idea. Ryan Postlethwaite 01:02, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's still without specifics or context. For all I know, he keeps coming back and asking forgiveness and keeps getting reblocked. If this guy is a freshman in H.S. now, should he really keep getting punished for something he did in 7th grade? -- Kendrick7^talk 01:11, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Kendrick! Yes, Ryan. I know, we don't have a good history but everyone deserves another chance! How would it feel for you to be in a situation like this? KingPuppy 01:13, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can we move the ANI discussion here please so I can partcipate? KingPuppy 01:18, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's probably no hope for this account now. Once you admit to being a banned user, in any context, you are done for. Even though it would be better for the project to know who you are so people can keep an eye on you, that's not, apparently, how things work around here. You're best bet is to just create a new account and never speak of you sordid past again. -- Kendrick7^talk 01:33, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Psh, I tried that before. :( May another admin join in this? KingPuppy 01:49, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you must have messed it up somehow. If you don't operate multiple accounts and don't vandalize, there's no reason for anyone to submit your account to WP:RFCU. There are like a million editors here, there's no way for someone to just "guess" that you are a banned user. -- Kendrick7^talk 02:05, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Were you User:SLSB? That user was blocked as your sockpuppet in September, though I'm having a hard time understanding under what conditions a WP:RFCU was performed.... -- Kendrick7^talk 02:15, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I was SLSB. I confessed because I want to be welcome here, not be here unwelcomed. If I am not to be here I guess that is OK but I just wanted to say sorry & get this off my shoulders. KingPuppy 22:14, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, somewhat bizarrely, you seem to have had gone off with that account and created a bunch of sockpuppets.[1] That's not terribly bright given your history with the project. On the other hand, that account seems to have been somewhat productive, for example: reporting vandals rather than vandalizing. Wikipedia is not a toy, and it seems dubious, given this recent behavior, that you've come to appreciate that yet. -- Kendrick7^talk 23:27, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, those were accounts I created for WP:ACC. KingPuppy 23:47, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So why have you got no edits to WP:ACC? Ryan Postlethwaite 02:00, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He could be waiting for you to decide whether or not he is allowed to contribute before contributing? PhilB ~ ^T/_C 13:29, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He means, why did his last account, User:SLSB, not make any note at WP:ACC that he was creating the accounts, although if you look at ACC, it seems like there are editors who create submitted usernames while not making any note regularly (i.e. a number of entries are marked account already created). This is slowly turning into a production of Les Miserables: he stole a loaf of bread and paid for it for the rest of his life. -- Kendrick7^talk 15:19, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

{{helpme}} Can someone help me? I tried to email ARBCOM and it came back undeliverable. Whats the email again? Also whoever helps me, can you participate in the discussion here please? Thanks KingPuppy 01:40, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, KingPuppy. The email address for the arbitration committee is arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org. As for your request that people who are unfamiliar with whatever the above discussion is about, participate in the discussion, it is unlikely that they would be sufficiently understanding of what the problems are, so requesting random people comment is probably not a good idea. Cheers, Ariel♥Gold 01:52, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]