User talk:PotsdamLamb

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).

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

Request reason:

This account is not a sockpuppet. It is my account on simple.wikipedia.com and ArbCom was notified before I created the account, with the caveat, I would not edit en.wikipedia.com. This account is a carryover across all wikis. This is the email I sent to them on January 14, 2021 at 1821 my time.

I wanted to make you aware of my alternate account that I use on simple, meta, and data. It is not my intent to edit “en.” however I may need to pull information or cites from it but in no way will I be editing en.Wikipedia.org/.com. Please make sure this account doesn’t get blocked nor my ip as it is not intended to be a sock of Galendalia. It is an alternate account since I no longer have the password to Galendalia. I do not need any problems on en. as I wait out another year to get unbanned. The new user is PottsdamLamb.

Thank you. PotsdamLamb (talk) 23:22, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

If you aren't going to edit the English Wikipedia, then there is no need to address this matter. 331dot (talk) 00:54, 31 January 2021 (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.

@331dot: I understand that part, but I want to make it perfectly clear this is not a sock of Galendalia. So I am just putting this up here for the record for when I attempt to come back next year. Thanks! PotsdamLamb (talk) 01:12, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Maxim

@Maxim: - Under what grounds did you have for checking this account? This is an alternate account being used on all other wikis and was tied across the board as I went to each one to pull information for simple.wikipedia. This is not a sock of Galendalia and I have made no edits on en other than the huggle js under my name so huggle works on simple but now I can’t edit it. Thank you PotsdamLamb (talk) 05:32, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock Request June 19, 2022

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).

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

Request reason:

I am requesting an unblock on enWiki as I have made significant changes to the way in which I behave and interact with others. I fully understand my previous behavior was extremely rude and downright gross to other editors. The insults I hurled at others were uncalled for and would never happen again. Granted I may get upset again, however, I handle it with a conversation that is non-derogatory and constructive without name-calling, blaming, etc. The entire block was based on my behavior and which has now changed.Thank you very much for your attention to this unblock request and I look forward to the results. PotsdamLamb (talk) 19:51, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Make your request on your original account, please. I'll note that you were so abusive, you've been both globally locked and banned. Yamla (talk) 20:06, 19 June 2022 (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.

@Yamla: Hi and thank you for your quick response. I do not have access to the Galendalia account anymore (as stated in my previous unblock above). The last sock was in 2020, however, it was not put in until September 11, 2021, so short of a year after the last sock. PotsdamLamb is not and never was a sock and still is not. It is the account I created to work on simpleWiki. I will request the unlock of this account on the stewards unblock board. Thank you for your response. PotsdamLamb (talk) 20:19, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Yamla: So it appears my account (the one I am on) was already unlocked per this discussion. I am asking for you to reconsider based on this as this account was inappropriately globally locked and was reverted and honestly, I did not even know about it until you just mentioned it. Thank you. PotsdamLamb (talk) 20:30, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your rudeness to me on Simple for reverting vandalism/en.wiki copying from an IPv6 vandal without attribution was not appreciated, and seeing you're blocked here for evading scrutiny on a past account for personal attacks, you definitely need to improve your behavior before you ever edit here again (the original account's behavior is good reason for keeping the block). I think @Yamla should be flagged to that incident on Simple as part of the consideration to unblock, so I'm doing so here. Nate • (chatter) 03:59, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mrschimpf I was not rude to you. If you read our front page it explains to you exactly what I was telling you. “Simple does not mean short. Writing in Simple English means that simple words are used. It does not mean readers want basic information. Articles do not have to be short to be simple; expand articles, add details, but use basic vocabulary.” At no point was I rude to you nor did I even revert your changes. Your edit out of the blue stood out to me since you had not edited there since 2016 and the first change you made was delete over 34k characters from an article. It pops up on our radar when people do that. Your edit remarks were not clear which is why I asked you why you did that. You wanted to argue the fact that our articles don’t need anything close to what enWP needs, but yet we do want that. Simple, as stated above, is using certain vocabulary for non-native speakers to understand. If you took me explaining to you why I questioned as to why you removed that much information (as you should know for an editor who fights vandalism is a huge red flag) and it was not clearly explained why, then I apologize for that. I did not accuse you of anything nor resorted to any type of bad behavior otherwise. If anything, your tone could have been taken as being rude to me but I did not see it as such and you didn’t mention anything about the IPv6 until the near end of the conversation. I do not monitor anything on enWP so I do not know what happens here. Again, if you felt I was rude to you then I apologize. PotsdamLamb (talk) 06:31, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Community ban lift

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).

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

Request reason:

I am requesting an unblock on enWiki as I have made significant changes to the way in which I behave and interact with others. I fully understand my previous behavior was extremely rude and downright gross to other editors. The insults I hurled at others were uncalled for and would never happen again. Granted I may get upset again, however, I handle it with a conversation that is non-derogatory and constructive without name-calling, blaming, etc. The entire block was based on my behavior and which has now changed.Thank you very much for your attention to this unblock request and I look forward to the results. You can see a lot of the work I have done on simple Wikipedia. All of my accounts were locked by a user who falsely listed information about my account and they have since been unlocked. I work directly with stewards and and admins (we do not have many experienced editors on simple) on IRC when I have questions and the appropriate places to go when I have questions. I have learned a lot more about the workings of WP. I was blocked for 6 months late last year for the calling someone a name but have not done so since and I have had great, calm discussions since. I have expanded one article to a great extent and am working on my second one which is a BLP that I was able to save from being deleted. Just as a side note when I look back at the discussions on WP:ANI I disgust myself for that behavior. I am willing to take the standard offer. I do not have access to any of my other accounts (as stated above) because I use a password creator and my passwords range from 40-90 characters if allowed. This is my only active account I use and I am working on a bot on media that I am developing and that name is PDLArchiveer Bot (I believe). These are my only accounts. I look forward to getting the feedback from the community and being unbanned. Thank you. PotsdamLamb (talk) 10:14, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only. You need to request the removal of your ban from your original account. 331dot (talk) 12:12, 15 July 2022 (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.

@331dot: - As stated, I do not have access to the account anymore. I have no password for it nor can I log into it. I had removed the email and everything. PotsdamLamb (talk) 16:29, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's unfortunate for you as there is little reason for us to accept your claim at face value. However, you are welcome to make another attempt and try to convince someone else. 331dot (talk) 17:05, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot No worries. I will get this little hiccup taken care of and when it is, I will post back on this for you. Thank you for the message! PotsdamLamb (talk) 17:08, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

331dot, looked at this: there haven't been any logins to the other account from what I can see, and I don't see any socking within the last 3 months. I think you or someone else can copy the appeal to AN. I'd likely be opposed to unblocking as the original blocking admin of the main account in that discussion, but from a CU perspective I give my permission for the community to consider an unblock. TonyBallioni (talk) 22:54, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

PL, what do you think? 331dot (talk) 23:19, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot Just saw this, the new one is below per TonyBallioni's request. Thank you. PDL^{Talk to me!}_{OMG, What have I done?} 23:27, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Community Ban Lift (with comments)

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).

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

Request reason:

I am requesting an unblock on enWiki as I have made significant changes to the way in which I behave and interact with others. I fully understand my previous behavior was extremely rude and downright gross to other editors. The insults I hurled at others were uncalled for and would never happen again. Granted I may get upset again, however, I handle it with a conversation that is non-derogatory and constructive without name-calling, blaming, etc. The entire block was based on my behavior and which has now changed.Thank you very much for your attention to this unblock request and I look forward to the results. You can see a lot of the work I have done on simple Wikipedia. All of my accounts were locked by a user who falsely listed information about my account and they have since been unlocked. I work directly with stewards and and admins (we do not have many experienced editors on simple) on IRC when I have questions and the appropriate places to go when I have questions. I have learned a lot more about the workings of WP. I was blocked for 6 months late last year for the calling someone a name but have not done so since and I have had great, calm discussions since. I have expanded one article to a great extent and am working on my second one which is a BLP that I was able to save from being deleted. Just as a side note when I look back at the discussions on WP:ANI I disgust myself for that behavior. I am willing to take the standard offer. I do not have access to any of my other accounts (as stated above) because I use a password creator and my passwords range from 40-90 characters if allowed. This is my only active account I use and I am working on a bot on media that I am developing and that name is PDLArchiveer Bot (I believe). These are my only accounts. I look forward to getting the feedback from the community and being unbanned. *Per the information provided above, TonyBallioni has performed the CU check and has verified no login from my account and no socking. He asked me to repost this on IRC. This was his statement Prefer public, but basically I told 331dot that since there are no logins I can see through CU, I believe your story on loss of access and there does not exist from a CU perspective any reason that would prevent an unblock. Since you're banned, it now has to go to AN. I would post a new appeal on the current account and ask an admin to copy it to AN. If there are any questions, you should be able to reply using PDL The prefer public was from me asking him if he wanted to chat in a DM or in public. With that said, I am asking for this to be moved over to WP:AN and I will add the page to my watchlist. Thank you for your time and consideration. PDL^{Talk to me!}_{OMG, What have I done?} 23:26, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I've closed the community appeal here. To highlight the key points - your actions still make people feel like you would run into problems and be resistant to conceding error. However, the absence of personal attacks and socking is an improvement that most in that position never make. On an individual basis, I would suggest trying to work on the particular behaviour shown over at simple-wiki over the next six months and then appealing from that platform. Nosebagbear (talk) 17:34, 26 July 2022 (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.

Per the information provided above, TonyBallioni has performed the CU check and has verified no login from my account and no socking. He asked me to repost this on IRC. This was his statement Prefer public, but basically I told 331dot that since there are no logins I can see through CU, I believe your story on loss of access and there does not exist from a CU perspective any reason that would prevent an unblock. Since you're banned, it now has to go to AN. I would post a new appeal on the current account and ask an admin to copy it to AN. If there are any questions, you should be able to reply using PDL The prefer public was from me asking him if he wanted to chat in a DM or in public.

With that said, I am asking for this to be moved over to WP:AN and I will add the page to my watchlist. Thank you for your time and consideration. PDL^{Talk to me!}_{OMG, What have I done?} 23:26, 16 July 2022 (UTC)}} PDL^{Talk to me!}_{OMG, What have I done?} 23:26, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have placed this at AN. 331dot (talk) 06:48, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@331dot Thank you. PDL^{Talk to me!}_{OMG, What have I done?} 07:13, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@331dot I was wondering if you could add aka Galendalia to the topic line since that was how people knew me on enWP please? PDL^{Talk to me!}_{OMG, What have I done?} 15:49, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. 331dot (talk) 17:29, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot Thank you. PDL^{Talk to me!}_{OMG, What have I done?} 17:35, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot Can you please add the following statement to my appeal?

I have been reading my appeal, however, I cannot post on ANI, but I wanted to answer the question that seems to be lingering. My edit count on simple is over 1k with no rollbacks of my changes (other than vandals). All of my contributions have been a net positive. I have expanded numerous articles, as well as, handling a lot of formatting issues, organizing page sections, cleared numerous categories with backlogs that had some sort of error on the articles and many other things. I also do have rollback rights on simple. One issue I had in the beginning on simple was with categories, which has since been remedied. I have stayed within what I know and have gone slowly and a matter of fact I posted that same advice to someone who was just blocked on enWP and started in on everything possible and caused some issues. I advised them to slow down, read through all of the policies, go very slow, preview all edits and if you are not sure, hold off and ask others for their opinions. I know it may be hard to determine if I would be a net positive on enWP, which is why I stated I would be willing to accept the standard offer to show the enWP admins and editors of what I can do so the proper determination can be made, without referring to the edits and arguments in the past I have had with editors and admins. Thank you and if you have any questions, I can directly answer them on my talk page here.

Thank you 331dot PDL^{Talk to me!}_{OMG, What have I done?} 21:17, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Block Decline

@Nosebagbear I only had the one incident, which is getting close to a year ago, but other than that I have had no other issues. I will continue trucking on though. Thank you all for the feedback. Da Lamb^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 17:39, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Status on Simple

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

A heads-up to admins here; PDL was indeffed on Simple August 2 for incivility and CIR issues (which sadly checks out; see above my frustration on trying to keep a Simple article...simple and reverting obvious vandalism PDL somehow took offense to). Nate • (chatter) 02:50, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Had an alert on my Simple page; now they're pursuing IP sock vandalism by trying to 'denigrate' me, thus PD's talk access there has now been revoked. Nate • (chatter) 03:58, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And now the account is globally locked, thus everything above this is moot. Nate • (chatter) 02:25, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.