User talk:Lordpermaximum: Difference between revisions

I receive any messages here.

I just wanted to say good job standing up against these wannabe authoritarians on here who try to control every aspect of editing a page that doesn't meet their obviously skewed criteria. You went about it the right way and set a good example of how to deal with these kinds of issue I too have encountered as an editor. I'm sure Cassiopeia will probably try to revert the Conor McGregor page when she sees it but I fully support the change and agree with you 100%. We as editors have a duty to not be biased to a certain source we favor when other more reliable, accurate, sources are available and you did a good job upholding that principle so kudos to you friend. Hunterb212 (talk) 00:41, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Right now all I can say is thanks. I feel you. Don't worry about her or her friends. Neither she nor anyone can override the policies of Wikipedia and the common sense. They can't game the system by a few of them getting together.Lordpermaximum (talk) 01:26, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello , I am coming here to you and want you to help me from having users like Cassiopeia and nedochan from ruining wiki pages with vandalism . Please take a look at Tony Ferguson’s height which is listed in the ufc at 5’11 but for some reason his wiki page says 6’0 . Basically the same issue with the mcgregor page a few days ago . They use Sherdog as a reliable source . Do something about it like you did with the mcgregor page and let’s stop them from reverting such accurate edits . Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiman122112 (talk • contribs) 15:13, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiman122112, I can't do anything for it, yet. But you can do something about it. The place you're looking for is WP:RSN#Responses_(Sherdog.com). I voted for option 4 there but you can vote for whatever option you like. Vote there, if you want your voice to be heard. Best, Lordpermaximum (talk) 17:16, 15 October 2020 (UTC).[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for Disruptive editing: making discussion at WP:RSN practically unmanageable, harassing other editors, edit warring, false accusations of vandalism, personal attacks, refusing advice from other editors, and an overall battleground attitude. One week to read up on policies and guidelines, and observe how other editors interact with each other. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}.  Floquenbeam (talk) 19:13, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This absolutely has to stop. If it reoccurs upon block lifting/expiring, the next one will likely be indefinite. Being new doesn't mean you get to do whatever you want, attack whoever you want, and disrupt as much as you want. It means you're forgiven for not knowing things. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:14, 17 October 2020 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

I did none of those things but committed one personal attack in the very end against a guy that was constantly harassing me. Instead of dealing with him, Floquenbeam gave me a warning of indefinete blocking for harrasing the guy that was harassing me even before any of this or the PA. I put a normal comment on Squared.Circle.Boxing's talk page, then he deleted it. I found it uncivil and rude so I put 2 more normal comments again, he deleted them again and told me to stop. Then I stopped. And somehow, without any reporting, Floquenbeam saw Squared.Circle.Boxing's talk page history, came to my talk page immediately and gave me that indefinete block warning with a patronizing tone that followed with personal attacks. In the process he also called me douche and accused me of having a previous account. It was unbelievable. Especially them coming from a Wikipedia administrator. I also added a bold text that described the text below it in the mentions part in an RfC and changed the font size of that small subsection to be consistent which included Squared.Circle.Boxing's two posts for better view of an RfC. Floquenbeam gave me an indefinete block warning for that also. After that moment and learning what's wrong and not, I never made any disruptive editing like that again. Before that warning, I also edited my comments that was not replied to which shouldn't be a problem. That's about it. I never broke the 3RR rule also. I now wonder where are the supporting diffs for the things that he claims I did? I need to prove everything here in this Wikipedia with countless reliable sources and diffs but still sometimes that's not enough. But Floquenbeam on the other hand throw countless accusations without any evidence to back most of it at all and block me from everything for 1 week. Is this how Wikipedia operates? Do these policies only apply to newcomers like me? How does no one from those debates, the people that I interacted with, never got a warning but on the other hand I immediately got 1-week block from the whole Wikipedia? I've practically been editing in the last week only. That's about it. So, you can check my, Squared.Circle.Boxing and NEDOCHAN's (the other editor that constantly I debated with) edit histories in the last week to see if I did all of those things that Floquenbeam says or not. Also you can check them to see if my version of it is true or not. I admit it looks I made a little bit of disruptive ending without knowingly (my poor English grammar and constant edits to fix mistakes later certainly didn't help) but I immediately stopped it after getting an indefinete block warning. However, I was on the receiving end of User:Jimbo Wales/Statement of principles, WP:DNB, WP:NPA, WP:CIV, WP:HAR and WP:Administrators violations before doing that one and only personal attack in the end. Not even one warning against any one but I am blocked for a week from the whole site. This is not justice.Perm 23:31, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

• the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
• the block is no longer necessary because you
  1. understand what you have been blocked for,
  2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
  3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 07:52, 18 October 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.

I want to ping all bureaucrats and arbitrators since I don't think Floquenbeam is suitable for being an administrator. I never got this kind of treatment in my whole life from anyone. Let alone in a place that I just started living like a new guest. Is this how Wikipedia welcomes guests and newcomers? {{u|Acalamari}} {{u|AmandaNP}} {{u|Avraham}} {{u|Bibliomaniac15}} {{u|Cecropia}} {{u|Deskana}} {{u|Dweller}} {{u|MBisanz}} {{u|Maxim}} {{u|Nihonjoe}} {{u|Primefac}} {{u|SilkTork}} {{u|UninvitedCompany}} {{u|Useight}} {{u|Warofdreams}} {{u|WereSpielChequers}} {{u|Worm That Turned}} {{u|Xaosflux}} {{u|Xeno}} {{u|Beeblebrox}} {{u|Bradv}} {{u|Casliber}} {{u|David Fuchs}} {{u|DGG}} {{u|GorillaWarfare}} {{u|Joe Roe}} {{u|KrakatoaKatie}} {{u|Mkdw}} {{u|Newyorkbrad}} {{u|SoWhy}}Perm 23:53, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Really enjoying this fun game people play where they ping the entire Arbitration Committee to their user talk page. Not super obnoxious at all. Not at all likely to lead to your talk page access being revoked if you do it again. Pinging every single crat is nice new wrinkle, well played. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:22, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Beeblebrox, thanks for your time majesty. How does the virtual world look from up there? Is it that different than the real world? If you need help with anything in the real world, don't be shy, come to me.

Warofdreams, you saw the first days of Wikipedia as I watched from the distance as a webmaster. There was only one instead of thousands; but no pride, only knowledge.Perm 02:45, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

PS, As you've pinged all the ARBs, it'll be interesting to see their replies. Beeblebrox, you rock. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 07:52, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

PPS @Lordpermaximum: Please tell us if you think commentary is in any way appropriate. Thanks, --Deepfriedokra (talk) 08:24, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ofc not, Deepfriedokra (talk). But that's the very end where I only made one true mistake after all the bullying, harassment, personal attacks, uncvil behaviour etc. I got in the last week. Squared.Circle.Boxing's personal vendetta never ended the whole week because I had shared my suspicions about him in my practically very first edit and prevented a couple others from WP:RS violations. Additionally, a few editors wanted to continue use sherdog.com as the sole reliable source thousands of articles which I prevented in the article of Conor McGregor and was going to prevent it in the whole site also. Somohow they took offense to that. But they never got any warning. I got 1 week ban because of the comment you quoted which was the first time ever. Where are the supporting difs for all those things Floquenbeam accused me with then?

If you don't think my last comment after after all these User:Jimbo Wales/Statement of principles, WP:DNB, WP:NPA, WP:CIV, WP:HAR and WP:Administrators violations against me appropiate, how about this one in the very first warning I ever got from an Administrator because I changed someone else's post's font style to be consistent with the rest without even knowing that was not permited and edited my vote comment after, which was not even replied.

Here's a Wikipedia administrator's sudden personal attack to me out of nowhere for no reason although I was being as nice as I could be. [1]

Did he get any blocks? Warnings? But you blocked a newcomer from the whole site after my only personal attack because I was provoked. Shouldn't you also evaluate provocations? If you think this is justice, I won't ever comment here again. There's enough injustice in the world. I don't need one more to deal with.Perm 09:28, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Well, I was pinged (you pinged Cecropia, for reasons passing understanding but whatever), and people should really be more careful what they wish for. I read this user's history, and I looked at the history of his sandbox, which is a blatant attempt to game EC, and I changed the block to indefinite. I don't know why he's here, but it's for something he desperately needs EC to do. Let's stop wasting our time. Katie^talk 17:11, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  And I've now pulled ECP. I deleted the /sandbox as well, so that should make keeping track of legit edits (if and when this block gets lifted) for the next 500. Primefac (talk) 02:05, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Not sure why I was pinged as I have no more authority than any other admin to do anything here. It looks like things have been handled, so I'll go back to other things. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 16:04, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]