Pukachu

User account is probably a sock puppet. --Uncle Ed 17:47, August 9, 2005 (UTC)

"Courteous" edits

After brief discussion with A Link to the Past, I understand there's a possible dispute arising over some disagreed edits being made to Super_Smash_Bros._Melee#Non-playable_characters.

Brilliant. This is a publicly-editable encyclopedia. Discussions over content are exactly what we're after.

From what I can gather, Link disagreed that certain of the entries were appropriate; probably considering them to be fancruft. You then reverted his removal of these, probably also in good faith. That isn't a problem. Be bold!

The problem here (and it's a little one, so it's practically over) is that you then criticised Link, claiming that it was discourteous for him to edit the article without consulting you about it. The thing is, that editors of an article don't own that article, and future editors are under no obligation to seek permission from former editors before they contribute. If you disagree with someone's edit, you consider reverting it (bear in mind the three-revert rule) and then you take the discussion to the talk page.

Regardless, you've made some fine edits, and I can see that what you've done is in good faith. Welcome to the Wikipedia, and I hope you enjoy your stay. Rob Church 17:45, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

My apologies, it was I who contacted A Link to the Past and asked him to make sure he backed up his edits on talk pages as a courtesy to others. It seems a pity that he was in no mood to listen. Devilbat

You DO realize that I offered to 'clean up my act' if you took back the claim that I got angry when things were reverted, right? And you refused? And you DO realize that the intro given to every new Wikipedia user encourages people to be bold? If you don't like how I edit, tough crap. You were in no mood to be courteous by not making up statements on people, so expect no courtesy from me. -- A Link to the Past 01:11, August 9, 2005 (UTC)

All the same, Link, I have left a message on your page.

To Pukachu, please do not worry. Wikipedia has its moments. I would like to advise in a friendly way that you tone down your language, as your last couple comments on Talk:Vampire were out of line and violations of Wikiquette. Devilbat

And how would you know about Wikipedia having moments, your account is nearly brand new... Oh, that's right, because you were hear before on other names but those went bye bye. Gotcha. Always funny to see a sock talking to another sock to try to make it look real. Funny that. DreamGuy 01:31, August 9, 2005 (UTC)

Block

Hi Pukachu, you've been temporarily blocked from editing for disruption and personal attacks at Talk:Vampire. If you feel this is unfair or want to discuss it, please feel free to e-mail me using the link on my user page, and I'll get straight back to you. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 03:13, August 9, 2005 (UTC)

I am sorry and I won't do it again. Pukachu 04:51, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

Hi again, I see you got Ed to unblock you on the promise of an apology. Apology accepted as far as I'm concerned, though one to the person you attacked might be in order too. ;-) It probably is best to stay away from articles where someone you're in dispute with is editing, though I know it's very frustrating to have to do that. Happy editing anyway. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 05:00, August 9, 2005 (UTC)

Reblocked by me, then unblocked by IRC request of RobChurch. Remeber to read Wikipedia:No personal attacks policy page. Uncle Ed 17:53, August 9, 2005 (UTC)

Man, yet another second chance on a block for clear violations? DreamGuy 23:57, August 9, 2005 (UTC)

socks and stuiff

If you want to be proopven as Not a sock pup[pet, get your IP address some how, then give it to an admin, then get the person youe supposdedly a sock of to do the same, and give thier IP to the same admin, if they arent he same, you win, and guess who has to apologize? :-D

also, i removed profanity from a post of yours, hope you dont mind... Gavin the Chosen 13:06, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

• To get a sock check run, talk to User:Brion or User:David Gerard - you need to be a developer to do it, and these two are. They're also helpful. Rob Church 16:41, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

Note that the person Pukuchu is being suspected of sockpuppeting for has demonstrated the ability to use lots of different IP addresses. This is discussed both in the apporopriate section of the Administrator's Noticeboard Incidents page under the User:Existentializer and later bans and also in the Pukuchu section, where a large number of rotating IP addresses carried on harassment against various editors recently and also tried to remove any mention that Pukuchu was being investigated. Any "sock check run" needs to take these sitauations into account. DreamGuy 23:57, August 9, 2005 (UTC)