User talk:Voltaireuk123

Welcome to my Talk Page

Feel free to leave a message.

November 2015

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to 2015 Rugby World Cup has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: 2015 Rugby World Cup was changed by Voltaireuk123 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.959923 on 2015-11-03T19:12:11+00:00 .

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 19:12, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with upload of File:UCGS logo.png

Thanks for uploading File:UCGS logo.png. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 22:06, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Live updates

Hi.

Please do not update statistics or scores while a match is in progress. Instead, wait until the match has finished before updating. At WikiProject Football there is a consensus not to add live scores and also a consensus not to update any statistics while a match is in progress. Without live updates it is easier to avoid duplicate information and errors from being published on the article.

Please keep this in mind. Thank you. Qed237 (talk) 16:18, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Timestamp

Hi.

When you update statistics please remember that you should also update the timestamps as of when the stats are correct. This is done by manually updating the date above or below the statistics table. By doing this we show when the stats were last updated and it prevents other editors from accidentally updating the stats again.

Please keep this in mind. Thank you. Qed237 (talk) 16:18, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

May 2017

Hello, I'm Guanaco. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to User:Paleocemoski— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. —Guan aco 07:35, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia. —Guan aco 07:37, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

One piece of advice

If you want to be accepted as a member of the Wikipedia community, let it go and move on. Abandon the "Voltaire" identity, stop vandalizing, don't bring it up. I don't think you're subject to a formal ban, so just stop. Walk away from Wikipedia for a while, then come back with a new identity when your head is cool. Then actually make constructive edits without causing any more damage to your own reputation or to the encyclopedia. What you're doing now is purely destructive. —Guan aco 07:56, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet of 2000voltaire (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · logs · block log · arb · rfc · lta · SPI · cuwiki) that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. —SpacemanSpiff 08:18, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am not a sockpuppet.

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).

Voltaireuk123 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am not a sockpuppet. I have a friend who chose a similar username to me around 2 years ago. My friend is the sockpuppet, not me. The only reason we have 'Voltaire' in our username is because we are great fans on the philosopher Voltaire. Please trust me because I feel as if I am being cornered for no reason here. I have no reason to sockpuppet. I am just here to ask the admins to forgive him. They could have said yes or no. But instead you decide to lure me into all this problem. I did not cause any of the recent probems. User:Guanaco began to revert my messages even though they were my messages written to admins. Overall, I do not mean any harm and I am just here to help out my friend. Anyway, it was over 2 years ago, that my friend started to sockpuppet. If you think I am sockpuppet, think again because I doubt any sockpuppet would try to repeat the same mistakes 2 years later. I hope an admin takes this on board and the respect the fact I was here for my friend, not to be a sockpuppet or to vandalise. That is not purpose.

Decline reason:

So, ~~after this account (Voltaireuk123) was blocked, you suddenly~~ forgot its password and created a new account (Ukvoltaire321), and then when that one was blocked you suddenly remembered the password for this one again? The only thing that is less believable than that is that you actually expect us to believe it.

Oh, and from this account (Ukvoltaire321) you spoke of "User:2000voltaire and his sockpuppets User:Ukvoltaire123 and User:Voltaireuk", yet you are now claiming that Voltaireuk123 is not a sock of 2000voltaire but just a deliberately-chosen and almost identical name to Ukvoltaire123? I am this close (positions finger and thumb to indicate a very short distance) to revoking your ability to edit the talk pages of all your accounts, and I will do so if I see any more of this ridiculous trolling. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:26, 29 May 2017 (UTC) (Striking error, above, will comment below. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:57, 29 May 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.

Then why did you create Ukvoltaire321 (talk · contribs) an hour ago? Materialscientist (talk) 08:36, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot my password for this account, so I decided to make a new one. And then I remembered the password again and logged into this. It sounds strange but that is what genuinley happened. This cannot be considered as sockpuppet as I barely made any contributions with the new account. I literally just made today when I forgot my password. You can check my contributions for my account if you want. You will see that I literally found out the password today and it hasn't been used for like a year. In my contributions you might see messages that make me sound like a sockpuppet like 'I AM BACK', but that was just a joke and was not meant to be serious. I must admit, I wrote that due to anger. If you want to warn me for vandalism, then fine, but I am definetly not a sockpuppet. Voltaireuk123 (talk)

Can someone please reply

I still haven't got a reply. Can someone please consider unblocking now please.

2nd Block Appeal

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).

Voltaireuk123 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I just want to clarify a few things in this block appeal. I created the account User:Ukvoltaire321 today before I got blocked in this account. You can check the times if necessary. Then after trying the password for this account I have successfully logged into this meaning that the account User:Ukvoltaire321 was not needed, hence I did not even make a single edit on that account. You can check that too. I get the usernames are similar, but you have understand that I am not a sockpuppet. This is my only account at the moment. Please think realistically. Would I come after 2 years just to start being a sockpuppet. Many usernames are similar on this website, but that doesn't mean they are all sockpuppets. Even on Wikipedia there is an analogy with a duck saying that it may look like a duck, but is it really a duck? I would not say you are wrong to assume that I am a sockpuppet, but please bear in mind what I just said and rethink your decision, because User:Boing! said Zebedee is making assumptions that I am lying when in fact I am telling the truth. I personally hate being called a liar and troller and I do not wish to be one. Please rethink your decison and hopefully there will be a good outcome.

Decline reason:

See, here you claim you created UKvoltaire321. But here, you claim your friend created it. These statements can't both be true. See now why we think you aren't telling the truth? Yamla (talk) 12:16, 29 May 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.

I misread the timings and apologize for that specific error - this account was blocked approximately 1 hour after the other was created, not the other way round. I've struck that part, above. But remembering the password for this one just after the other was blocked, this and this (and then massive edit warring over them), this, this, the multiple appeals on behalf of a claimed different person, the appeals to unblock them and their socks!... it all looks indistinguishable from trolling to me. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:07, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Yamla: I misread that too - it's UKvoltaire321 vs UKvoltaire123 (and not at all similar to Voltaireuk123 - no, I don't believe a word of it either). Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:23, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Heh. Yeah. I managed to misread it after seeing your post about misreading it. Still, I don't believe a word of it. --Yamla (talk) 12:54, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

3rd Block Appeal

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).

Voltaireuk123 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

See so I was telling the truth. But once again, I am not a sockpuppet. I am sorry for the edit warring. It just didn't look right that you were removing messages that were from me. Maybe I should have not appealed to unblock my friend and his socks. But classing me as sockpuppet is not right. I am not trolling and I really mean it. It isn't right to assume that I am someone else just because we have a similar username. Please respond and understand that am genuinely not a sock puppet. For more clarification let me repeat: I created the account User:Ukvoltaire321 because I forgot my password for this account which hasn't been used since last year. Then about an hour later, I remembered my password and so I decided to login to my original one. All I wanted to do was to ask an admin to remove the block of my friend's account, but then User:Guanaco kept removing my messages, which kind of got me fustrated. I know it isn't an easy thing to believe, especially when the usernames are so alike, but you have to hear me out on this one. So please for the third time, please remove this block of me as I know I would never sockpuppet. I guess it is just my bad day today to be accused of one.

Decline reason:

Fully concur with my fellow admin's decision to put a stop to this waste of time. Favonian (talk) 16:08, 29 May 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.

Why doesn't "your friend" make their own unblock appeal on their own talk page? Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:54, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

His account his globally locked, meaning he can't even log into his account anymore. That is why he asked me to try. And please don't quote friend like I am lying. We've been friends since primary school and he is a true friend to me. Maybe he has a bad habit of sock puppetery but he is still human so please respect him. Voltaireuk123 (talk) 14:00, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

User:2000voltaire is not globally locked - and that's one lie too many, so talk page access is revoked. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:08, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And I have now revoked talk page access from all of these accounts (which I should have done earlier to avoid this continuing waste of time). Whoever reviews the latest unblock request is welcome to reverse my decision without needing to ask me. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:12, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]