User talk:SithJarJar666/Archive 1

SithJarJar666, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi SithJarJar666! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Worm That Turned (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:03, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Systematic Overinflation of Gay Chickens

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing inappropriate pages, such as Draft:Systematic Overinflation of Gay Chickens, is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. theinstantmatrix (talk) 22:42, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of How can I eat raw scorpions without getting stung

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created, How can I eat raw scorpions without getting stung, was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. TheWinRatHere! 15:40, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, SithJarJar666. You have new messages at Talk:How_can_I_eat_raw_scorpions_without_getting_stung.
Message added 15:54, 1 April 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

TheWinRatHere! 15:54, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of How to sacrifice live chickens using your feet and a burned out lighter

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing inappropriate pages, such as How to sacrifice live chickens using your feet and a burned out lighter, is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. GirthSummit _(blether) 16:14, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:How can I eat raw chicken without getting salmonella/why is salmonella more prominent in stuff other than salmon than salmon

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing inappropriate pages, such as Draft:How can I eat raw chicken without getting salmonella/why is salmonella more prominent in stuff other than salmon than salmon, is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. ___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 16:21, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

April 2019

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to introduce inappropriate pages to Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. If you need guidance on how to create appropriate pages, try using the Article Wizard. ___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 16:21, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, SithJarJar666. You have new messages at Talk:How to sacrifice live chickens using your feet and a burned out lighter.
Message added 16:24, 1 April 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

TheWinRatHere! 16:24, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

April 2019

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  stwalkerster (talk) 16:27, 1 April 2019 (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).

SithJarJar666 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

It's April Fool's, people! I wanted to create a few nonsense articles just for today. Make sense? SithJarJar666 (talk) 16:36, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Duplicate request. 331dot (talk) 19:24, 1 April 2019 (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.

See Wikipedia:Rules_for_Fools - creating joke articles is vandalism, no matter what day it is. stwalkerster (sock | talk) 16:40, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry... I'll try my best to provide useful information for Wikipedia from now on... SithJarJar666 (talk) 16:42, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I suck at editing... I'll try to provide useful information from now on. SithJarJar666 (talk) 16:44, 1 April 2019 (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).

SithJarJar666 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I apologize for any harm I may have caused, I have read up on the Wikipedia guidelines, and I realize even on April Fool's day, vandalism is vandalism. I wish to request an unblock so that I can create useful contributions to Wikipedia. SithJarJar666 (talk) 17:03, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This unblock request has been declined due to your history of vandalism and/or disruption to this encyclopedia. However, we are willing to give you another chance provided that you can earn back the trust of the Wikipedia community. To be unblocked you need to demonstrate that you are willing and able to contribute positively to Wikipedia. You can do this by:

• Familiarizing yourself with our basic rules.
• Read our guide to improving articles
• Pick any pre-existing article you wish to improve.
• If you have trouble choosing an article to improve, see this index of articles needing improvement for ideas. Once you have decided on the article you will propose improvements to:
  1. Click the Edit tab at the top of that article;
  2. Copy the portion of the prose from that article that you will be proposing changes to. However:
     • do not copy the "infobox" from the start of the article (i.e., markup like this: {{infobox name|...}});
     • do not copy any image placement code (i.e., markup like this: [[File:Name.jpg|thumb|caption]]);
     • do not copy the page's categories from the bottom of the page (i.e., markup like this: [[Category:Name]]);
     • do not copy the stub tag (if there) from the bottom of the page (i.e., markup like this: {{Foo stub}});
  3. Click edit at your talk page, and paste at the bottom under a new section header (like this: == [[Article title]] ==) the copied content but do not save yet;
  4. Place your cursor in the edit summary box and paste there an edit summary in the following form which specifies the name of the article you copied from and links to it (this is required for mandatory copyright attribution): "Copied content from [[exact Name of Article]]; see that article's history for attribution."
  5. You can now save the page. However, if your edits will include citations to reliable sources (which they should), add the following template to the end of your prose: {{reflist-talk}}. Once you have added the template, click Publish changes.
• Now, edit that content. Propose significant and well researched improvements by editing the selected portion of the article. Please note that we are not looking for basic typo corrections, or small unreferenced additions; your edits should be substantial, and reflect relevant policies.
• When you are done with your work, re-request unblocking and an administrator will review your proposed edits.
  • If we (including the original blocking admin) are convinced that your proposed edits will improve Wikipedia as an encyclopedia, you will be unblocked.

If you need help while working with your proposed edits, you may add "{{Help me|your question here ~~~~}}" to your talk page. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 15:56, 2 April 2019 (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.

What useful contributions do you want to make? Any certain articles or topic areas you are interested in? 331dot (talk) 19:24, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm mostly here to make sure video game articles have more useful information, and I also want to create some really good articles on Star Wars stuff not covered already... SithJarJar666 (talk) 15:10, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I also want to lengthen some articles that are stubs, though I'm not sure whether or not to use British spelling, or US spelling, since no one can come to a consensus on that... SithJarJar666 (talk) 15:20, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I want to create a better Wikipedia, with less stub articles, more accurate information, and no spelling errors. Which reminds me, does Wikipedia use British spelling, or U.S. spelling? Things did get a little out of hand April 1st, and I sincerely apologize for that. My goal really is to create a better Wikipedia. SithJarJar666 (talk) 15:41, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have put a procedure above that you may use to demonstrate that you can make a constructive, substantive contribution(not just spelling or grammar fixes) which will show your ability to make good contributions. If you don't wish to make use of it, you are free to make another request, but making use of it would help the process. 331dot (talk) 15:56, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Feliz

Feliz is a municipality (município) in the Brazilian state of Rio Grande do Sul. (Muncipialites, in this case, are sections of cities/villages in Brazil, which are like counties in the United States of America). The population of Feliz was 13,208 as of 2016. [1] Feliz was founded in February of 1959. The area of Feliz is approximately 37 square miles. Feliz is in the Brazilian region of Sul, which is the southernmost region of Brazil, and its coordinates are 29°27′03″S 51°18′21". [2]

Request For Unblock

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).

SithJarJar666 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I rewrote Feliz, so I hope this proves I can be useful to Wikipedia. I didn't understand Wikipedia's policy on vandalism on April 1st, and I apologize. I admit it did get out of hand, and I do sincerely regret my mistake. If I'm unblocked and something pops up that isn't beneficial, I did it to try to help Wikipedia, it just didn't work out that well. SithJarJar666 (talk) 16:04, 4 April 2019 (UTC) @331dot:[reply]

Decline reason:

Your attempted modifications to Feliz are entirely unsuitable. For example, you've demonstrated you do not understand WP:RS. Yamla (talk) 14:11, 8 April 2019 (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 suggest that you confine the discussion to this page and account, I have removed your talk page access on your IP. 331dot (talk) 16:50, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds fine... SithJarJar666 (talk) 18:09, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

While you are blocked, the only legitimate use of this page is to request to be unblocked. You can experiment in your personal sandbox if you are unblocked. 331dot (talk) 18:47, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for letting me know about that, I didn't know. SithJarJar666 (talk) 21:58, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request For Unblock (again...)

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).

SithJarJar666 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Why was I Indef-Blocked instead of a 24-hour block? If I had got a 24-block, I would have realized my mistake, not done it again, and not had to pester you with unblock messages. So, I'm asking that you don't lift the block, but could you reduce it to a week or something? I sincerely regret my vandalism, and I realize it was wrong, no matter what day it is. So please, I'm asking you to unblock me. I promise I will do no more disruptive editing. If you give me some rope, I promise I'll use it for good, and if I don't, you can always block me again... TheSithLordJarJar (My talk) 20:25, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only. This unblock request has been open for more than two weeks but has not proven sufficiently convincing for any reviewing administrator to take action. You are welcome to request a new block review if you substantially reword your request. Yamla (talk) 18:30, 26 April 2019 (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.

You were provided a path toward being unblocked. Are you explicitly refusing to take that path? --Yamla (talk) 15:37, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I just think that the punishment was a little harsh. I really had no ill intent, I just wanted to create a couple nonsense articles for April 1st, and I realize that was wrong. A 24-block really would have adequately gotten the point across... SithJarJar666 (talk) 15:55, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please answer the question. Are you refusing the path you were offered? --Yamla (talk) 16:03, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, because I'm not really a researcher, and I just like to do minor edits, add more plot details to movie articles, work on Wikiproject Video games, et cetera, et cetera. I'm probably a WikiChild... SithJarJar666 (talk) 16:07, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for answering the question. I'll leave your unblock request to another admin to review. I think it would be inappropriate to lift the block, but other admins may think otherwise. --Yamla (talk) 16:10, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I second what Yamla has said; it's up to the next reviewer, but I think the only two paths to an unblock open for you are the path you were already offered or the standard offer. I regret that you think this is harsh, but we must be assured that you will be constructive with your contributions from here forward. Actions have consequences. 331dot (talk) 16:16, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My personal favorite article is probably Hungry Shark Evolution because I play that game far too much, so if someone vandalizes it, I can correct it quickly, since I know the content. (If unblocked, of course...) TheSithLordJarJar (talk) 15:55, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot: If you feel it isn't either your job or User:Yamla's job to unblock me, could you point me to another admin that might be willing to either unblock me/reduce my block time? not even that, just have another admin evaluate, maybe?

Pings do not work unless you sign your post. Your request is open and visible to other administrators. One should eventually review it. 331dot (talk) 21:14, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I forgot to sign that. I'll try to remember next time. TheSithLordJarJar (talk) 23:19, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot: Do you have any ideas for which admin for me to ping to notice my block? I am actually considering pinging Jimbo Wales himself at this point. Is Jimbo even still active on Wikipedia? TheSithLordJarJar (My talk) (What I've done) 18:21, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging administrators would be deeply inappropriate. You were provided a path to being unblocked and rejected it. You should expect to see your unblock request declined sometime in the next two weeks. It is possible but extremely unlikely that it would be accepted rather than declined. Had you followed the path to being unblocked, you could expect to see your request reviewed substantially faster than two weeks. Most users are not provided four unblock opportunities as you have been and with each subsequent request, there are fewer and fewer volunteer admins around to review it, so it takes longer. --Yamla (talk) 18:22, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Got it. TheSithLordJarJar (My talk) (What I've done) 18:24, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. I see your unblock request has been open for substantially longer than two weeks. I have therefore declined it as stale. You are free to take the path offered you or you are free to wait six months with zero edits and then apply under WP:SO. Those are your only options at this point, though. --Yamla (talk) 18:30, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Got it. I think I'll take a 6-month Wikibreak to enforce my six-month leave. See you in late October... TheSithLordJarJar (My contribs) 18:32, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck! --Yamla (talk) 18:33, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Okay, this is it, for real this time. Bye, Wikipedia. I can still browse Wikipedia in the next six months, though, just not edit, right? Okay, this is it, see you in six months. Good-bye. TheSithLordJarJar (My contribs) 18:41, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Even if you are banned, and I want to be very, very clear that you are not banned, you are always free to read Wikipedia. --Yamla (talk) 18:47, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Got it. This will be my last edit for the next six months. Thanks for informing me, Yamla, and thank you to everyone who has helped me. See you all in six months. Good-bye. TheSithLordJarJar (My contribs) 19:24, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Unblock III

{{unblock|I realize vandalism is wrong, I know a lot about video games so I can edit those articles, and if I had been hit with a week-block or a 24-block, I would have learned my lesson, and I wouldn't have had to keep sending unblock requests, therefore pestering all the admin that watch this page... [[User:SithJarJar666|TheSithLordJarJar]] ([[User talk:SithJarJar666#top|talk]]) 17:25, 16 April 2019 (UTC) }}

You declined the path you were offered to being unblocked, so you really shouldn't expect to be unblocked. Posting multiple simultaneous unblock requests after declining the offer you were given is outright abusive and if I see you doing that again, I will revoke access to your talk page. --Yamla (talk) 11:11, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Enough. You have access to this talk page solely for the purposes of getting unblocked. If you are using it for other reasons, you will lose access to this page. --Yamla (talk) 19:26, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Got it. I will stop abusing this talk page immediately. TheSithLordJarJar (talk) 20:43, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My final unblock request

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).

SithJarJar666 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I followed the standard offer and stayed away from editing Wikipedia for six months. I would like to come back and do my best to help the encyclopedia-the days of making nonsense articles to try to get in WP:DAFT are over for me. I regret those days, and I want to contribute usefully to Wikipedia. So I ask that you would let me back into the wiki. TheSithLordJarJar (My contribs) 15:17, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Part of the Standard Offer process is a routine check of your IP and useragent - which shows that you were editing Wikipedia as an IP only a few days ago. You are therefore not eligible for unblock under the Standard Offer until 30th April, 2020. Yunshui ^雲_水 22:27, 1 November 2019 (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.

The usual procedure with the Standard Offer is for your appeal to be taken to the administrators' noticeboard for community review. If the appeal is declined, you will be regarded as having been banned by the Wikipedia community. Is the above statement what you wish to have copied across to the noticeboard? Yunshui ^雲_水 09:15, 1 November 2019 (UTC) I edited my request, and that is the one that you can send to the administrator's noticeboard. I hope that they believe me... TheSithLordJarJar (My contribs) 15:44, 1 November 2019 (UTC) Got it. I will stop editing for six months-account and IP. Then I can come back and reapply for the standard offer...TheSithLordJarJar (My contribs) 00:38, 2 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I can explain

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).

SithJarJar666 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

The thing is, I really wanted to be able to "start over" on Wikipedia. I tried to contribute constructively, and I thought I did. I didn't realize operating multiple accounts was such a big deal, and I apologize for my ignorance. Does standard offer still work at this point? I know that if I get unblocked, I'll always have a checkered past, but I want to be able to fix the encyclopedia, since I used to disrupt it... TheSithLordJarJar (My contribs) 16:08, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

The standard offer is available to you no sooner than six months from the last edit you made. As of today, that is 2020-07-17. Note that any further instances of block evasion may lead to a community ban under WP:3X. Note that this unblock request was rampantly abusive, as you obviously weren't asking to be unblocked. Yamla (talk) 16:17, 17 January 2020 (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.

OK, done and done. This person is now community banned, per WP:THREESTRIKES, having been evading their block as King of Scorpions (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • nuke contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log). --jpgordon^𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇 18:53, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The secrets come out (this is probably the most formal letter I've ever written, and I'm in [withheld] grade...)

@Jpgordon: Okay, yeah, I deserve the ban. I've been a bad Wiki contributor, and an even worse friend. I claim all responsibility for Evil Sith Kitten. The IP vandalism? That was me, too. However, the other account (what was its name again, "King of Scorpions"?) is not mine. It's actually my (probably now former) best friend's. (We share an IP.) I got him into Wikipedia when he moved in. What I didn't tell him was that I had just been caught running ESK. Now I feel terrible. I got him into this. (I know this because he came over and screamed at me, "Why the FRICKETY-FRACK am I blocked?!!!?!?!") We share a disagreement over diep.io; I vandalized that article. I don't think either of us realized we were battling each other. So, I'm asking on the behalf of King of Scorpions. I don't care if I'm banned; if I was unbanned, the guilt would probably haunt me forever. I'm doing this because King of scorpions has no talk page access. Please, unblock him so I can sleep at night. Yours humbly, TheSithLordJarJar (My contribs) 22:41, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No. --Yamla (talk) 10:44, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Yamla: Could you at least post the above request to that admin noticeboard? (what's it called, WP:AN?) TheSithLordJarJar (My contribs) 15:12, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Yamla (talk) 15:49, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. TheSithLordJarJar (My contribs) 15:51, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(@Yamla: This is an add-on to previous thread in response to Ivanvector. Clarifying. Would you be willing to post it below their comment?)

The reason I didn't edit at all in last 2 months was coronavirus. Let me explain: I was in school until then. Then the schools closed, so I was stuck at home. "Ohh, nice diep.io article to vandalize" I thought. Worst. Idea. Ever. Especially since King of scorpions always edits from home... TheSithLordJarJar (My contribs) 15:28, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Yamla (talk) 17:01, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Yamla: Thank you! TheSithLordJarJar (My contribs) 17:13, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Jpgordon, Yamla, and NinjaRobotPirate: King of Scorpions here. Many thanks to SithJarJar666 for letting me use his account temporarily (he left a tab open that he was logged in on since I don't know the password, and said "here's your chance to speak, use it wisely"). I just wanted to say that everything SithJarJar66 said above is true. When I made that unblock appeal, I honestly had no idea what was going on. Now I know, and I hope that the Checkusers will believe my innocence... TheSithLordJarJar (My contribs) 19:22, 19 March 2020 (UTC) (the signature says SithJarJar666 but it's really King of Scorpions)[reply]

@Yamla: It's me again. Could you also copy this to WP:AN? Thanks.

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

---

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If the block is a CheckUser or Oversight block, was made by the Arbitration Committee or to enforce an arbitration decision (arbitration enforcement), or is unsuitable for public discussion, you should appeal to the Arbitration Committee.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

 NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:43, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Apology

(Posting this here because I cant put it anywhere else. Please don't revoke TPA, this will be my last non-unblock-appeal edit...)

I want to apologize to the Wikipedia community for all the wrongdoings I've made over the past year. I regret the socking, and the nonsense articles, and the vandalism... everything, really. I realize that socking is not acceptable because it deceives the community and leads them to believe things that aren't true. Because of this, I will never commit sockpuppetry again. I also realize that vandalism of any sort (whether intended to be funny or not) is unacceptable, and I will not vandalize again.

I will wait out my six-month standard offer and then appeal for an unban. Until then, I decided to post this apology to show that I have changed as a person. I regret the harm I have caused the Wikipedia community, and hope that someday I can rejoin as a trusted contributor.

Regards, --sithjarjar^(talk | contribs | email) 22:10, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

List of all accounts used

Making this list for full disclosure. As of today, all passwords have been scrambled in these accounts, so I can’t even log in to them if I wanted to. A CheckUser scan should verify this.

• Deathstalker725 (talk · contribs) my original account, I lost the password to it a long time ago.
• Total Eclipse 2017 (talk · contribs) sock
• Total Eclipse 2017 (AWB editing) (talk · contribs) sock
• King of Scorpions (talk · contribs) sock
• Evil Sith Kitten (talk · contribs) sock
• DojaCatFan (talk · contribs) I created this one to use to sock again, but changed my mind and decided to stop socking and scramble this one’s password. You will notice that I made like 20 edits with it on Simple and then abandoned it, even though it wasn’t blocked.

This is for reference when I make my unblock appeal. --sithjarjar^(talk | contribs | email) 20:58, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unban appeal

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

SithJarJar666 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Greetings, fellow Wikipedians. For the last six months, I have been serving out my ban for sockpuppeting and deceiving the Wikipedia community. In that time, I came to believe that the ban was necessary to get me to change my ways. I understand now that socking is wrong, since it is basically lying to the Wikipedia communtiy and convincing them that I'm something I'm not.

Since then, I have disclosed all my sock accounts, made good edits on the Simple English Wikipedia, and avoided socking since June 2020, which the Checkusers can back me up on. (Full disclosure: I did sometimes log into those sock accounts up until mid-July, but that was solely for checking the watchlists and notifications. All those accounts have had their passwords scrambled, and I couldn't use them again if I wanted to.)

Therefore, I would like to ask that my ban be lifted through community consensus. I ask that the Wikipedia communtiy would welcome me back into their midst. I understand that I will likely never be trustworthy, and that every edit I make will be under extreme scrutiny, but I ask that I would at least be given another shot at the English Wikipedia.

I understand that what I did was wrong. I understand that I initially got block for vandalism, and then I tried to evade my block by socking again... and again... and again. If I am allowed back on enwiki, I will continue the antivandalsim and copyediting work that I did on Simple Wikipedia.

I will never sock again (I would even be willing to be placed on a one-account policy for the next six months, and even after that I would only have a disclosed alt account for test purposes), and I understand that this is my final chance. If I mess up again, it's over for me. Even with these conditions, though, I humbly ask for an unban.

Regards, --sithjarjar^(talk | contribs | email) 21:45, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

Per AN. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 09:48, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@NinjaRobotPirate and Yamla: would you be willing to re-post this on WP:AN for the Wikipedia community to decide whether to unban me or not? Regards, --sithjarjar^(talk | contribs | email) 21:50, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:03, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unblocked

Welcome back. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 11:27, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Deepfriedokra: Wow, I didn’t actually expect things to go this well. Even if I’m not actually under a one-account restriction, though, I’ll still stick to one, unless I really have need for an alt... --sithjarjar^(talk | contribs | email) 17:24, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What now?

@Deepfriedokra and AmandaNP: Well, I’m unblocked... what now? I kinda feel afraid to make an edit after floquenbeam’s comments... apparently if I make a mistake he’ll block me, and I’m a bit rusty on enwiki policies... --sithjarjar^(talk | contribs | email) 17:28, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Go slow and if you have a doubt as to whether an edit improves the encyclopedia, don't. As someone once said,

Every time you click [publish changes], be completely convinced that what you are saving will make Wikipedia a better, more freindly, and more successful project, and if what you've typed won't do that, don't. click save."

--Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:44, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Welcome back to the English Wikipedia SithJar, I hope we see many more useful contributions to come from you. And yes by "fuck around", I think he meant actual vandalism and not honest mistakes, so don't worry too much. Kind regards, :) --IWI (talk) 18:46, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, good to see you on enwiki IWI! I’ll try to come back to simple at some point, but you understand if I stay here and get used to enwiki rules again for some time, right? ;) --sithjarjar^(talk | contribs | email) 18:55, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your user name

I, too, would like to welcome you back. (I read the section posted at WP:AN.) I also read your name change request. Would you have made the request if someone had not made a unkind comment about it? As one of the original StarWars fans, beginning in 1977, when I saw the film five times that wonderful summer....

Positive interpretation: A Sith is a highly intelligent, dedicated and educated person. Jar Jar has a heart of gold, and always WP:AGF assumes the best of those he meets. So, I am preferring to look at the good qualities, represented by your name! Of course, you may still wish to change your name...but I thought you might appreciate a more positive interpretation. And, of course, The Matrix provides many admirable possibilities. The young man who ran ammunition and saved the day in "Revolutions" comes to mind...Now, I have to rewatch the film to recall the name, (I am old). He is a great role model. Anyway, thanks and respect for the good edits to Simple English WP. Best wishes for your WP career, Tribe of Tiger ^Let's Purrfect! 23:19, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations on your unblock!

I would also like to welcome you back. I read your previous talk page and am convinced this highly extended block of yours was a misunderstanding. You seem to have been putting all your effort into improving Wikipedia and its related projects since you were blocked on the 1st of April, and I would like to commend you for that. Good luck! sam1370 (talk · contribs) 05:36, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I welcome you return too, SithJarJar; you did some good copy-editing as Total Eclipse 2017. If you're still interested in copy-editing, the GOCE's December blitz is currently underway; good copy-editors are always in short supply! Welcome back and cheers, Baffle☿gab 02:09, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feliz
2. https://tools.wmflabs.org/geohack/geohack.php?pagename=Feliz&params=29.4508333433_S_51.3058333433_W_type:city(13208)_region:BR-RS