User talk:Deck the Hallz

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This blocked user (block log | autoblocks | rangeblocks | unblock | contribs | deleted contribs) has asked to be unblocked, but an administrator has reviewed and declined this request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock request while you are blocked.

Request reason: "This is an outrage! So I'm cruising Wikipedia one day. I never signed up before. Then I see that this Pule article is nominated for featured article. I want to help that article reach this goal, so I sign in (I doubt votes from IP addresses would count for much), put in my two cents, and I'm automatically accused of being a sockpuppet, and indefinitely blocked with, as I see, no way to appeal, as Feats-O-Strength has. REAL nice. Is it really THAT hard to believe that there are people OTHER than F-O-S that appreciate the Pule article for what it's really worth? Cause it's a sad state of affairs if it is. Anyone new who doesn't conform with the norm (hey, that rhymed!) gets the block for being a sock (I gotta stop these rhymes)"

Decline reason: "Indentical reason to here. The even more compelling part is the blocks were executed three hours ago, and yet both accounts requested unblock one after the other within five minutes of each other after this three hour period. Please, don't insult our intelligence. Daniel 11:26, 8 November 2007 (UTC)"

Please make any further unblock requests by using the {{unblock}} template. However, abuse of the template may result in your talk page being protected.

WHAT?! You're denying my request for unblocking because Feats-O-Strength requested unblocking within five minutes of me?! Has it ever occurred to you that that can happen WITHOUT sockpuppets involved? It's called coincidence. Now, I know you wikipedians have a policy of using common sense, but this just takes it way too far. Deck the Hallz 11:35, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

-- Deck the Hallz (talk) 20:46, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I am insulted.

You are very immaturely basing my indefinite block on pure speculation. If that's the case, which I do believe it is, then I think my block should at most be a week, if not lifted immediately with a full apology! An indefinite block without any definite proof isn't exactly my idea of a friendly community. Deck the Hallz 23:29, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

If you really are a different person, it would've helped if you edited more articles. If you hadn't just edited that Pule nomination and your user page, you wouldn't be seen as a sock puppet. (I don't think Pule is a real holiday.) 99.230.152.143 00:44, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Alright, so Pule isn't a real holiday. I still think the article was well-written and deserved to be featured. Now really, as previously stated, this block is based on little more than speculation and slightly suspicious circumstances. If anything, it should only have lasted a week. This is insanity. Deck the Hallz 18:46, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Look, please unblock me. I can and will prove that I am not only not a sockpuppet, but a potential asset to Wikipedia. My edits will be constructive. I will prove myself. Gimmie a fair chance. Deck the Hallz 19:00, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

BTW,I feel sorry that your unblock decline reason is kind of a stretch. 99.230.152.143 01:59, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

I know, it's like, I sign up for Wikipedia, I put in my out-of-place opinion, and suddenly I'm accused of being a sockpuppet for Feats-O-Strength. Where's the trust? -- Deck the Hallz (talk) 20:42, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

This kind of feels like it's my fault. I mean, if I hadn't nominated that Pule article for featured article, you wouldn't have voted in it and gotten blocked like this. -- Huh (talk) 20:44, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Don't blame yourself. It's neither of our faults. It's simply a case of lack of trust. -- Deck the Hallz (talk) 20:47, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

If you say so. I still feel somewhat responsible. -- Huh (talk) 20:49, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Oh, BTW, I fixed the title for this section of the page, you know, the "I am insulted." thing. -- Huh (talk) 20:50, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanx. You're a good person, FOS. I can call you that, right? -- Deck the Hallz (talk) 21:03, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

No problem. -- Huh (talk) 21:04, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

I wonder why Cloveious (talk ยท contribs) assumed you were a sock puppet? 99.230.152.143 (talk) 22:57, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Here's my story. I was browsing Wikipedia when I came across an article for the fictional holiday of Pule. It looked really well-written, but I had known in the past that it had been deleted. I went to the talk page, and saw that it was a featured article candidate. I thought this was great. I signed up for Wikipedia under this user name, and voted to support Pule's becoming a featured article, despite the fact that nobody else seemed to be. For some strange reason, these people thought that because I was new and was supporting an unpopular opinion, I was a sockpuppet for Feats-O-Strength, the person who nominated Pule for featured article in the first place. After they've come to their outrageous and speculation-based conclusion, they blocked Feats-O-Strength for one week, and me indefinitely. Deck the Hallz (talk) 13:52, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Sigh. Must've been a good article. Oh,and by the way, I think you're a different person. 99.230.152.143 (talk) 23:20, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

THANK you. That's 2 people so far that actually believe me. Deck the Hallz (talk) 11:34, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

I can't believe they still don't believe you. Huh (talk) 01:16, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. :) 99.230.152.143 (talk) 01:40, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Y'know, I still can't believe they're being so stubborn about this. I mean, COME ON! Wrong place, wrong time. Have these people not heard of coincidences? Deck the Hallz (talk) 00:43, 19 December 2007 (UTC)