Freshstart101
Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.
If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page — I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.
Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...
Finding your way around:
Need help?
|
|
How you can help:
|
|
Additional tips...
|
|
Horologium (talk) 16:26, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
ANI notice
editHello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Dr.K. λogosπraxis 19:30, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
Let's keep the discussion centralised at ANI. I do not need reminders on my talkpage. Thank you. Dr.K. λogosπraxis 20:16, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
- You know, I'm a good guy. I feel like the ex-con who just couldn't ever get a break :( Freshstart101 (talk) 20:18, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
- Well then, lets just see what he has to say. If that is the way he feels then fair enough. To be honest I thought I did the right thing. My behaviour was terrible so I took a long break from the site. Then I decide to come back and make it right. Whats the first thing that happens? I get reported in ANI. You couldn't make it up. Does Assume Good Faith apply equally to everyone? I guess not. Freshstart101 (talk) 20:27, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
- Well, AGF should normally apply, but in this case there is this demand you are making that Hohenloh must acknowledge that you should be on good terms, which is a long-standing demand from last year. This long-lasting focus on a single editor and for a specific purpose, to acknowledge good relations with you is a bit bizarre IMO. Ergo the ANI report. If you could just forget about this demand I see no problems whatever. Dr.K. λogosπraxis 21:03, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah right. If you ask me you are being a busybody and you would have better contributing to the encyclopedia rather than stirring the pot for no reason. Freshstart101 (talk) 21:25, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
March 2011
edit
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Elockid (Talk) 21:36, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
Freshstart101 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Why wasn't I informed about this conspiracy against me? Why wasn't I given a fair trial? Why wasn't I allowed the opportunity to explain and state my case? Why is the word of the investigator taken as gospel? Does he/she not understand I have a shared IP? This is a Show Trial, end of story, a clear attempt to remove someone opposed to the conspiracy of the mediocre on this site. If I wanted to insult Dr. K i would have done so, I am completely innocent of these charges. There was no fair process here whatsoever, all done behind closed doors by the committed partisans of Dr. K.
Decline reason:
This is an encyclopedia, not a court of law. You were clearly and unambiguously abusing multiple accounts in order to attack other people, and I concur with the blocking administrator on that. –MuZemike 23:30, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
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.
Freshstart101 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I would like the opportunity to adress the crimes I am supposedly guilty of. A fully reasonable explanation can be given to all discrepancies. I was supposed to be afforded the opportunity to defend myself and state the valuable information which would acquit me; yet I wasn't even informed that I was under investigation. Please rethink; I am wrongfully accused and should be entitled to some form of defence.
Decline reason:
You've been given a link to the checkuser results. Feel free to post an unblock request that addresses the material presented there. I see no reason given to dispute the findings there and unblock this account. Kuru (talk) 14:39, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
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.
Freshstart101 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
So I can plead my case here? Alright then. First of all the user 'noobbody' was an account of my flatmate. I told him of the little storm in a teacup invented by some wikipedian guy and he thought it was hilarious, especially when I showed him the ANI report where Dr.K suggested a 'persistent pattern of harassment' even though I hadn't contacted user:hohenloh in almost a year. He thought this was so funny and that this guy must represent everything bad about wikipedia. Without my knowledge, he created that account to abuse and call Dr.K names, something I knew nothing about until he told me there today. Unfortunately I can see you just dismissing this without giving me a fair chance; I can physically prove my innocence if allowed appropriate latitude to avail of all existing legal methods at my disposal. As you can see, this was all a misunderstanding and I'm afraid, once again, I am not ever going to be at the received end of WP:AGF
Decline reason:
{Perhaps unfortunately for you, it is less likely that we will remove your block because of that story. Truthful or not, we take you at your word and thus we will have to leave the account blocked as there is no way for us, from this end, to verify this. You'd be better off, should you truly wish to contribute and edit productively, creating a new account entirely. I'd also suggest finding flatmates who won't make your life so difficult. — Daniel Case (talk) 16:55, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
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.
Freshstart101 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I see. Even though your policies are supposed to assume good faith, you will not assume good faith in this instance. Again, I reiterate, the root cause of all of this is a little busybody with too much time on his hands who invented a drama in order to further his 'status' among fellow wikipedians, in order for him to eventually become admin.
Don't bother asking me to create another account. I already have several, some of whom are in top positions. I fight an underground guerrila war against this site; have done so for years. I fight the injustice and inequity of this system; Dr. K is one of my enemies, as he represents all that is base and bureaucratic about this project. Delete me, but you shall never delete my ideas. The Wikipedian brotherhood will eventually triumph, and your reign of terror shall come to an end. It is foretold.
Some day our brotherhood will triumph, and all of the petty admins will be disposed of and banned. A new order based on reason will emerge. Every day we insert reason into articles, challenge those who seek authority, and generally further the cause of a good encyclopedia on this site. Since this place is run like a concentration camp where dissent is squashed, we cannot operate openly and have been forced underground.
Decline reason:
Given your open declaration of war against Wikipedia and your continuing abuse of another editor, I decline your unblock request and have changed its duration to indefinite - all you had to do was wait two weeks and you'd have been fine -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:58, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
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.
- Your latest abuse of your Talk page has been reverted and your Talk page access revoked -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:11, 25 March 2011 (UTC)