User talk:Littleteddy
 | This account may need to be blocked due to abusive use of multiple accounts.
Please see Checkuser for evidence and further information. (Account information: block log · CentralAuth · suspected sockpuppets · confirmed sockpuppets) |
Retired
This user is no longer active on Wikipedia.
- I will not be contesting the block, as I feel that Wikipedia is no longer 'my place'. Littleteddy... keep me in a good mood 11:42, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
- That is fine, but if you continue deleting and/or changing the sockpuppeteer tag I will protect your page against editing. It is very misleading to claim you are simply a "retired editor" when in actual fact you have essentially been community banned given that you have been blocked following multiple "confirmed" checkusers, that your unblock requests have been declined and that no admin is willing to unblock you in light of the evidence presented by the checkuser and other privately presented evidence. I'm not going to delete the "retired" tag but it is not going to be replacing the sock tag because that is giving a dishonest and misleading message. If you continue removing or weakening the tag I will simply protect this page. You have been blocked indefinitely and so there really is no need for you to continue editing this page. If you decide you want to try another unblock request, you can email unblock-en-l or you can follow up with the arbitration committee directly. Sarah 11:56, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
- Could you please protect the page anyway? If I feel that in the future, for some reason, that I want to launch an unblock request I can use email. Littleteddy... keep me in a good mood 11:59, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
- I would prefer it if both my userpage and talk page could be deleted, then recreated with the tags at the top of this page, then protected. If that's not possible, could you please protect both pages? Thanks, Littleteddy... keep me in a good mood 12:00, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
- I've protected this page partly due to your repeated removal of the CU block tag and partly because of your request, but I am not going to delete the history of your talk page. We don't normally delete user talk pages unless there is a very good reason for it and it's generally not acceptable to do so when the result of doing so - whether intentional or not - is to obfuscate evidence. I am willing to delete and protect your userpage, though, and will do so now. I will also delete any other subpages you have under this account. If you get unblocked in the future, I, or another admin, will undelete them for you if you wish. Sarah 12:22, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
- I would prefer it if both my userpage and talk page could be deleted, then recreated with the tags at the top of this page, then protected. If that's not possible, could you please protect both pages? Thanks, Littleteddy... keep me in a good mood 12:00, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
- Could you please protect the page anyway? If I feel that in the future, for some reason, that I want to launch an unblock request I can use email. Littleteddy... keep me in a good mood 11:59, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
- That is fine, but if you continue deleting and/or changing the sockpuppeteer tag I will protect your page against editing. It is very misleading to claim you are simply a "retired editor" when in actual fact you have essentially been community banned given that you have been blocked following multiple "confirmed" checkusers, that your unblock requests have been declined and that no admin is willing to unblock you in light of the evidence presented by the checkuser and other privately presented evidence. I'm not going to delete the "retired" tag but it is not going to be replacing the sock tag because that is giving a dishonest and misleading message. If you continue removing or weakening the tag I will simply protect this page. You have been blocked indefinitely and so there really is no need for you to continue editing this page. If you decide you want to try another unblock request, you can email unblock-en-l or you can follow up with the arbitration committee directly. Sarah 11:56, 29 March 2008 (UTC)