User talk:Tourettes Guy

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).

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

Request reason:

There is no reason to block me, I haven't done anything wrong. So what if I am trying to get a page reposted? I am doing so respectfully and without violating any of the Wiki rules.

Decline reason:

If you want the Tourettes Guy article undeleted, then please don't create single purpose sockpuppets to actively campaign and canvas for it since it's disrupting Wikipedia to illustrate a point. If you would like to be a cooperative member of the Wikipedia community, I suggest you file an appeal at Wikipedia:Deletion review. -- Netsnipe ► 09:00, 3 November 2006 (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.

-Once again, my name is fine. Tourettes Guy 08:15, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove information from your talk page. Let me point out that it is highly unlikely you will be unblocked because of Wikipedia's username policy. Another major point going against you is that you have stated you are here only to reinstate an article which the wider community has classed as unsuitable for Wikipedia. If you are really Danny or associated with Tourettesguy.com, let me say I am a fan of the site but it hasn't had the wide spread media coverage of other internet phenomenons such as the Numa Numa dance, Star Wars Kid or Leeroy Jenkins. Even Brian Peppers doesn't have an article and he is arguably more notable. You are welcome to edit here but please respect the consensus of the wider Wikipedia community.--Hamedog_Talk|^@ 08:20, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WHAT THE FUCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THIS FISHSTICKS ARE HARD AS TITS!!!! AHHHH BITCH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"...hasn't had the wide spread media coverage..." *rolls eyes* Half of the listed Internet phenomena on Wikipedia don't get media coverage. Tourette's guy is very well known on the Internet. This is just more hypocriticial idiocy from Wikipedia. I see no reason why he shouldn't have an article. Also, the "consensus" is laughable. There are plenty of people who think there should be a wiki page on Tourette's guy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.75.59.121 (talk) 19:58, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't see how its hypocritical. Wikipedia decides which topic are acceptable based on coverage in reliable sources. Without that coverage, there really isn't any material to add to an article. --Kraftlos (Talk | Contrib) 22:30, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I ammend you!

I ammend you on your attempts to get a Tourettes Guy Page! You are right! They need one! Who gives a Dead Moose's Last Shit if he isnt real! Zim isnt real yet they give him a page! You are a saint for trying this! Cheers! - Bladez636 (talk · contribs)