User talk:Cæsey
My other accounts are:
Xenrose (Not currently blocked)
Hartconan (blocked)
1984 Cadillac (blocked)
Dryercotes (blocked)
Rufus Rose (blocked)
Stephen Cali (blocked)
Thank you.
Please block these accounts and possibly lock them.
Cleanstart is clearly not applicable here.
Sincerely, Caesey
MascotGuy
[edit]Special:Log/Spectrum Guy.[1] Please consider using a consultation method. Thanks. -- zzuuzz (talk) 07:16, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
- Oh. I must have missed that one. Thanks, If you have not already done it, i will just go unarchive that. Cæsey(Light•Dark) 07:19, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks, yes unarchiving is something I could have done myself. The other part's the important bit. Have I had this conversation with you before? -- zzuuzz (talk) 07:23, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
- No., but you have talked with me before. Cæsey(Light•Dark) 07:25, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
Purpose of Wikipedia
[edit]Your account was created on 10 April 2018 and your total number of edits is under 520. On 12 April 2018 Primefac deleted a section from WP:ANI with edit summary "DENY": diff. Before deletion, the section was permalink.
Primefac also blocked your account. Vanjagenije accepted an unblock request with an edit summary that included "see the talk page". At that time, the talk page was permalink and included your reply to zzuuzz which requested an unblock with conditions that included (diff):
- I do not edit user pages except my own EXCEPT...
- I do not edit long-term abuse EXCEPT...
- I do not tag socks etc.
Special:Contributions/Cæsey shows an upsurge of activity including a very unhealthy interest in LTA and sock pages. Examples:
- Fiddling on a user page of someone indeffed in 2007.
- Busy-work on talk of an indeffed user who last edited in 2012.
- Tweaking LTA pages.
The purpose of Wikipedia is to develop an encyclopedia. That does not involve returned users with a fascination for socks and LTAs. Johnuniq (talk) 07:46, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
LTA lists
[edit]Can you please explain your series of edits Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/List here? CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 17:46, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
- Chrissymad, it appears they have retired. Primefac (talk) 17:53, 27 April 2018 (UTC) (talk page stalker)
April 2018
[edit]
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:27, 27 April 2018 (UTC)I know they said they are retired, but that isn’t binding and this is. This user seems only interested in screwing around and making messes others have to clean up. Why they do this is unimportant, the fact that they do it is enough to warrant a block to prevent further disruption. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:28, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
Unblock
[edit]
Cæsey (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I request to be unblocked on my account. I am new to Wikipedia and still learning. I am happy to follow constructive advice on what I should or should not do and apologise for any errors I have made. But have been blocked twice now without warning, which is discouraging for a new user. The first time I was blocked I was suspected of being a sock puppet and investigation found that I was not. I was so discouraged at the messaging before the second block that I put a retirement template up so I could think about my contributions and how to do better, but then found I have been blocked again. I have been trying to follow the rules as I understood them and work on building the site. With regard to the comment by Chrissymad thought I was being helpful in cleaning up and archiving old reports which hadn't been active for a long time. I also find it had to understand why an interest in the workings of Wikimedia itself with respect to the processes around LTA and Socks is an "off limits" topic, if it is then I will stay away from those topics and work on other topics while I am learning. There were other considerations which I had discussed with Primefac by email, which had a bearing on this but which he advised were best not to put on the Talk page, if you would like some insight into those please email me. I now understand why beeblebrox blocked me, and I will try to be more constructive next time. If I am unblocked I will work within the following following restrictions: * I do not edit LTA/WP pages. FULL STOP. * I only edit article space, my user and user talk pages, and others user talk pages to ask them questions. * I will stay away from all pages except article space, article talk space, my user page and user talk, and other users talkpages until I gain a better understanding of what are considered acceptable contributions to the site. If I violate these restrictions , I accept that I will be blocked. I also request if i am unblocked, to be adopted by a more experienced editor. Sincerely, Cæsey(Light•Dark) 09:11, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
Decline reason:
If the only way you can edit is with those restrictions, you have no business editing at all. Wikipeia requires editors to be able to engage in dialogue about content and their own actions. What you are suggesting would make that difficult to the point where blocking would cause significantly less disruption. TonyBallioni (talk) 15:01, 29 April 2018 (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.
- You made promises last time you were blocked, and broke them almost immediately. You said you quit and put up a “retired banner yesterday and today you’re back again. Makes it hard to believe any promises you may make. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:27, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
- I would have blocked you myself if you hadn't put up the "retired" template. I would like to hear your response to Beeblebrox, but as it stands my feelings currently are quite in line with theirs, mostly because you've now gone back on your stated actions twice in as many days. Primefac (talk) 01:04, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
- Also, Zzuuzz: my decline stands on it's own regardless of this, but is there any chance that this is UpsandDowns1234 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki): their unblock request is quite similar in style and to an extent follows the suggestions that Iridescent laid out. They share the obnoxious userpages and interest in messing about with things beyond their capacity to edit. This account was also created the same day UpsandDowns1234 withdrew their rename request on meta. UpsandDowns1234 also apparently has a newfound interest in abuse filters, like our newfound LTA hunter here, and, miraculously, was blocked on their main account ~8-9 months ago, which is how long Cæsey claims to have been reading the manual. TonyBallioni (talk) 15:24, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
- No, I don't think so, quite unlikely (usual disclaimers apply). -- zzuuzz (talk) 15:33, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
Unblock
[edit]Cæsey (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I will edit constructively, and I will never sockpuppet again, regardless of the state of the unblock request. I am sorry for what I did, and I will prove that I am here. If you have any doubts, then tell them to me, and I will answer. I'm so sorry. Sincerely, Cæsey(Light•Dark) 04:03, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
Decline reason:
You've demonstrated pretty conclusively we can't trust you. Really your only chance now is WP:SO, and I think that's something of a stretch considering your behaviour so far. Yamla (talk) 11:38, 31 May 2018 (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.