User talk:Red Rover112

March 2012

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for trolling and good hand/bad hand editing in violation of WP:SOCK as User:Imgayrofl. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. WilliamH (talk) 19:46, 29 March 2012 (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).

Red Rover112 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Whilst this block doesn't really bother me (since I barely edit here anyway, I mainly use it for research and stuff like that as a resource or whatever.) I would just like to say I do share this IP, in a household of 4 people. I don't know what my brother gets up to but he could have done it. Trolling and vandalizing wikipedia is totally pointless as proven by vandal after vandal and revert after revert, I seriously have better things to do with my time than to troll wikipedia. Of course, you don't have to believe this nor is there any actual way to prove it. But again, being blocked doesn't bother me all that much, I rarely edit these days preferring Uncyclopedia (mainly because I like humor and its a quieter place to be), but yeah if you do unblock me I will edit on the rare occasion but if you choose to not believe me here I will not complain and leave you guys be. Cheers. ~Red Rover (Talk to me!) contribs 04:33, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Read WP:BROTHER An optimist on the run! 06:56, 30 March 2012 (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.

Didn't expect you to believe me even though its the truth, I don't care. I'll be off now. Bye then. ~Red Rover (Talk to me!) contribs 07:00, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I also find it funny you're assuming my little brother did it. And that you're willing to throw someone who made hundreds of legit edits out just because they may have done something stupid even though you have no way of proving it. Also The GNAA is for idiots with no life, so quit accusing me of being associated with a sock that supports that organisation. ~Red Rover (Talk to me!) contribs 07:06, 30 March 2012 (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).

Red Rover112 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Further to my previous argument, your page is basically saying a vandal account was created under your IP. Whilst you could be telling the truth, its been used so many times that we're not gonna buy it. Then ok, permablock my IP address and allow me to edit through my account. That way no vandal socks can come from here regardless of me telling the truth or not. I would also like to point out I made tons of good edits and that throwing me out like this with no conclusive proof of anything is kinda unfair on me who made a lot of good edits in my time might I point out. I then ask you why would I after making so many good edits just be an idiot and make a troll account? I mean, its kinda a waste of my time when I see this account closed. I also ask to be unblocked in regards to my credit on other sites. Please please please just give me the benefit of the doubt here, I don't think any troll no matter how determined would bother to construct an argument this long. And I hate, HATE vandals that waste my time on other sites, why would I do it to you then? ~Red Rover (Talk to me!) contribs 07:39, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Your arguments don't make any sense. There's technical evidence linking you to a troll account, first you are suggesting your little brother did it, then deny everything, then refer to yourself as "we". Max Semenik (talk) 07:58, 30 March 2012 (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).

Red Rover112 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I should be unbanned because I can easily avoid it. Regards :D ~Red Rover (Talk to me!) contribs 08:22, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Congratulations! Thank you for proving Wikipedia correct in blocking your account. It's this kind of childish behaviour and threats to break policy that are exactly what the project does not need. Well done pleading your case. If you had read WP:GAB and acted accordingly, you might have been successful. No longer. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:24, 30 March 2012 (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.

(talk page stalker) I predict a decline followed by removal of your talk page access is just around the crn. Mt king ^(edits) 08:55, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing your talkpage due to abuse of the unblock process. You may still contest any current block by e-mailing unblock-en-l, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.

(talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:24, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

RfC: New helper policy

Hello member of Category:Wikipedians who use IRC! You are invited to join an ongoing discussion on Wikipedia talk:IRC/wikipedia-en-help aimed at defining a policy for prerequisites to being a helper in the "#wikipedia-en-help ^connect" channel in a section titled "New helper policy".

To prevent future mailings about IRC, you may remove your user page from Category:Wikipedians who use IRC.
Assistance is available upon request if you can't figure out where it is being added to your user page.
This message has been sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:59, 27 April 2015 (UTC) on behalf of — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)}[reply]

Fair Use in Australia discussion

As an Australian Wikipedian, your opinion is sought on a proposal to advocate for the introduction of Fair Use into Australian copyright law. The discussion is taking place at the Australian Wikipedians' notice board, please read the proposal and comment there. MediaWiki message delivery MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:08, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This message has been automatically sent to all users in Category:Australian Wikipedians. If you do not wish to receive further messages like this, please either remove your user page from this category, or add yourself to Category:Opted-out of message delivery