User talk:Loopy48

Welcome

Hello, Loopy48! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! --Nuujinn (talk) 21:17, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Getting Started
Getting Help
Policies and Guidelines
The Community
Things to do
Miscellaneous

Policy changes

Please do not edit policies to support your position in a content dispute. Gigs (talk) 18:27, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

HW

I've improved the two footnotes for W's father. Please reconsider the tag. Thanks.Anythingyouwant (talk) 18:43, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Protesting interference

I'm working at the local community college and would like to get home before midnight. Please leave your comments for my talk page instead of interfering with what I'm writing on the talk page of attachment theory. I've been editing my own comments and have had to redo them twice because of interference. Margaret9mary (talk) 01:55, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Question?

Hello, I've a brief question, based on your most excellent and advanced editing skills. Is this a multiple account and if so would you consider notifying the curious of your other user name? I would entirely understand if you didn't choose to answer, as its really none of my business - see WP:DBQ. Thanks, and happy editing. Trilobitealive (talk) 01:08, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am surprised that you think my editing is excellent and advanced, as there are very few things I have figured out how to do. My editing is very limited in scope, though I am trying to learn how to branch out. So thanks for the compliment. Loopy48 (talk) 01:40, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. My comment about your editing skill was genuine and not with any intention to criticize. Keep up the good work! Trilobitealive (talk) 00:04, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
However, you didn't answer the question. Have you edited here before under another name? We do have Wikipedia:Clean start for editors wishing to distance themselves from old accounts, so I think that if this is the case, notifying the arbitration committee to allay fears it is a user returning from sanctions is a good idea. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:59, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No, I have no alternate account. Why should you think I do? Since I have been given feedback that several of my edits are stupid and wrong, what are your suspitions based on? Not that my editing is "excellent and advanced". Two different editors are accusing me of this. Perhaps you just do not want new editors to edit at all. Is this the case? The initial message to me was welcoming so I thought I could try out editing in a benign atmospher. Was the welcoming tone false? Loopy48 (talk) 03:36, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You were using templates and wiki-edit summaries within a few edits of beginning. Hence my offer of contacting arbcom under the terms of Wikipedia:Clean start. We welcome new users and users returning under this policy. :) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:22, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I can start a new account if you want. Do you want me to change my name to something else and start over? I've only be actually editing a short time, though an observer for longer. Do you usually ask people to change their names after such a short time? I haven't notice this happening before. It seems unusual, but if you say so I will do it. But I will still edit the same way as I do now, since my edits are based on copies of other edits and are all short as I haven't figured out longer and more complex ones. Loopy48 (talk) 14:45, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

Hello Loopy48. You are blocked as a sock of Mattisse (talk · contribs). Note to reviewing administrators - please refer unblock requests to either checkusers or the Arbitration Committee. Thanks. Risker (talk) 04:40, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Appealing a block

I have been blocked from editing. I received no warning, except someone asked me if I wanted to change my name. I want to appeal the block. I have done nothing wrong as far as I can tell. What did I do? I am not a sock, but I will change my name if that is required. Please help. Loopy48 (talk) 15:29, 2 January 2011 (UTC) Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks[reply]

Please read Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks fully and then use the {{unblock}} template on your talk page to make an unblock request. Thank you. --Mysdaao talk 15:43, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Appealing a block

I have been blocked from editing. I want to appeal the block. I have done nothing wrong as far as I can tell. What did I do? I am not a sock. Please help. Loopy48 (talk) 15:29, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, as above, you are asked to ask CheckUsers, which can be found here Special:ListUsers/Checkusers or the Arbaration Committee. I am sorry, Only they can help you with this situation. Thanks for your concern.  JoeGazz  ▲  16:20, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
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).

Loopy48 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am a new editor who has been blocked from editing forever. I didn't mean to edit wrongly and I don't think I broke any rules. I read the Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks. Please unblock me and tell me the mistakes I made so I won't repeat them again. My email is blocked also, though I have never used it to Wikipedia, so I cannot appeal the other ways suggested or appeal on the Administrators Notice Board. Thanks.

Decline reason:

This is a checkuser block and therefore not subject to review by administrators. The only way to appeal this block is to email the Arbitration Committee at arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:16, 2 January 2011 (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 have been told to "ask CheckUsers" or "the Arbaration Committe" but how can I do that if I am blocked forever and my email is blocked? Loopy48 (talk) 16:37, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

First, please wait for an administrator to answer your unblock request. He or she may send your request to users with CheckUser or the Arbitration Committee. If not, the Arbitration Committee page I linked to has direct e-mail addresses you can use, but like I said, please wait for an administrator to respond first. Thank you. --Mysdaao talk 17:16, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(editing conflict)

I have been told on wikipedia-en-help that a request has been filed on my part at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mattisse which should clear me, as I am not a sock of anyone. Loopy48 (talk) 17:22, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Check User case has been deleted with no explanation. Therefore, it appears that no one is interested in finding out whethter I am a sock or not. Why? Why is no one interested in giving me a reason why I am blocked forever.

The request was closed and archived because it wasn't the right place to handle such a dispute. You need to send an e-mail to one of the addresses listed there if you want to dispute your block. --Mysdaao talk 17:32, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
One of the addresses listed where? At request? Loopy48 (talk) 17:58, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have emailed two addresses: arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org and functionaries-en@lists.wikimedia.org Both have bounced.

Loopy48 (talk) 18:58, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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).

Loopy48 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have been listed as a sock confirmed by Checkuser. However, no Checkuser has been done and there is no evidence that I am a sock. Attempts to complete a Checkuser to clear me have been deleted. Loopy48 (talk) 22:31, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I've already told you that no admin can do anything about this block, because it's a checkuser block. Email the address I gave you above, but I'm now revoking your access to this page since nothing can be done to address this block here. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:13, 2 January 2011 (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.