User talk:THE PRESIDENT

Advice on starting to edit

My advice to new editors is that it is best to start by making small improvements to existing articles, rather than creating new articles. That way any mistakes you make will be small ones, and you won't have the discouraging experience of repeatedly seeing hours of work deleted. Gradually, you will get to learn how Wikipedia works, and after a while you will know enough about what is acceptable to be able to write whole new articles without fear that they will be deleted. Over the years I have found that editors who start by making small changes to existing articles and work up from there have a far better chance of having a successful time here than those who jump right into creating new articles from the start. I certainly wouldn't recommend a new editor jumping straight into Wikipedia:Requested articles, as the whole point of that is for inexperienced editors to ask for help from those who do have experience, and therefore know what a new article should be like. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 23:01, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

So I've been blocked from editing, likely in response to the RFC that I opened on the Villlage Pump. I'd suspect that someone didn't agree with it and didn't want me to carry it out further. This would be a direct case of WP:ADMINABUSE. Please unblock me as soon as possible. Thanks. President (talk) 00:40, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You are not blocked. Primefac (talk) 00:53, 30 March 2017 (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 A check of this shows that you are not currently blocked. MarnetteD|Talk 00:42, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Not only is this account not "currently" blocked, but it never has been blocked. So that we can help sort out what the problem is, can you say what made you think you were blocked? Is there perhaps a block on your IP address, or on another account you have used? The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 08:28, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@JamesBWatson: The error message that I see when attempting to edit any page except this page is Editing from THE PRESIDENT has been disabled by Elockid, expiring on 9 November 2017. I don't want to wait that long to edit. I'll ping @Elockid: to see if they can comment on the issue. President (talk) 19:21, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You probably won't get much of a response since Elockid has not edited since July 2016. ~ GB fan 19:27, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The comment was primarily directed at JamesBWatson, who asked the initial question. Although, on a side note, should the {{not around}} template or something similar be placed on Elockid's user page and/or talk page? President (talk) 19:32, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I also would seriously wonder how Elockid blocked me if he is potentially retired or semi-retired. I don't want to jump to negative conclusions, but the small possibility of a compromised admin account should be lightly considered. President (talk) 19:33, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Well, that is totally bewildering, both because there is no record of your account being blocked, and because there is no record of Elockid doing anything at all on Wikipedia (editing, blocking, or anything else) since 6 July 2016. And no, a compromised admin account is not the answer, as the block would still show up in Elockid's log if someone else had done it using that account. I can only assume that it is some sort of technical glitch, so I'll post a message at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) in the hope someone there can help. Is what you posted the complete message you see when trying to edit? If there is any more then it may help to post all of it, even if it doesn't look significant. Does it mention any other account, or an IP address? (If it mentions your IP address and you don't want to post it publicly you can email it to me in confidence. To do that you will need to enable email in your preferences, which you get to from the "preferences" link at the top of the page.)

It occurred to me that blocking you and then unblocking might possibly get rid of the spurious block. I have no technical reason to think it would work, but I have known similar actions to work in other situations, rather like switching off and on again electrical equipment that isn't working. However, that would mean you would no longer have a clean block log, so I wouldn't try that unless you gave me permission. I hope we can sort this out before too long. In the meanwhile I suggest waiting a few hours and then trying logging in again, to see if the problem has gone away on its own. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 19:44, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@THE PRESIDENT: ~~Okay, you're just making this up as you go along, aren't you?~~ Your account is not, and has never been blocked. The web hosting range you're editing from is blocked, however, but it was blocked less than 24 hours ago by someone other than Elockid. —DoRD (talk) 19:52, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so I see that you're now using a web hosting range that did happen to be blocked by Elockid. A year and a half ago. —DoRD (talk) 19:55, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@DoRD: What do you mean by "web hosting range"? President (talk) 19:57, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The message you're seeing when you try to edit is this. —DoRD (talk) 20:02, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@DoRD: No it isn't. President (talk) 20:04, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This blocked user's request to have autoblock on their IP address lifted has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request.

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

THE PRESIDENT (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Block message:

Editing from THE PRESIDENT has been disabled by Elockid, expiring on 9 November 2017

Blocking administrator: Elockid (talk • blocks)

Decline reason: No idea where that message you're quoting is coming from. Both IP ranges you've been trying to use are blocked as Digital Ocean webhosts. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇} 20:24, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what else to say. I was able to edit just fine when I first registered, and then all of sudden I was blocked. My initial reaction was that I had been blocked in response to the village pump discussion that I started and the incident with the RA article that was speedy deleted. However, that would've been a case of WP:NOTPUNISHMENT (and therefore also a case of WP:ADMINABUSE). JamesBWatson has said that my account is not blocked, so that idea is off the table. The block message that DoRD linked to is not the message I see when I try to edit. I also don't know what this "Digtal Ocean Webhost" discussion is all about. President (talk) 20:27, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And why the hell has @JamesBWatson: blocked me indefinitely? Is this the technical test that was mentioned above? President (talk) 20:29, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)

You have done what at first appeared to be wasting my time, by getting me to spend considerable time and effort in trying to sort this out, as though you were a good faith editor caught in some strange mistaken block. However, it wasn't entirely a waste of time, as the outcome of my investigation is that I have discovered that this account is evading blocks on other accounts, probably the group of accounts arbitrarily referred to in Wikipedia as Orangemoody. Consequently, this account now really is blocked. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 20:32, 30 March 2017 (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).

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

Request reason:

You are mistaken, Mr. Watson. I have looked up who "Orangemoody" is and have reviewed the long-term abuse case associated with that account and others. After a review of that page, I can say that the only behavioral overlap between me and that account is the creation of one promotional article (which I still don't even feel was promotional). Other than that, my behavior has not been disruptive, let alone wasting anyone's time. I was able to edit just fine yesterday, and then was suddenly blocked for no real appearent reason until now. Please unblock the direct block on the account and revisit the technical issue matter. I can assure you that I am not making anything up here. If you have reason to believe that I was intentionally disrupting the project and/or evading blocks, please provide the specific content diffs which give you that conclusion. President (talk) 20:37, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I don't care what block your evading, what I do care about is the amount of time that is being consumed by your shenanigans. Your entire edit history is a play on "dancing on the edge of disruption". You are clearly here to troll and enough time has been spent enabling you in that endeavour. Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:43, 30 March 2017 (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.