User talk:IronKnuckle - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Anthony Bradbury (talk | contribs) at 20:52, 23 January 2013 (how did you know how to nominate for Afd?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 20:52, 23 January 2013 by Anthony Bradbury (talk | contribs) (how did you know how to nominate for Afd?)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

This is IronKnuckle's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

WP:ANI

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 14:59, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello, IronKnuckle, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one of your contributions does not conform to Misplaced Pages's Neutral Point of View policy (NPOV). Misplaced Pages articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media.

There's a page about the NPOV policy that has tips on how to effectively write about disparate points of view without compromising the NPOV status of the article as a whole. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{Help me}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Misplaced Pages:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Hell In A Bucket (talk) 15:48, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Well I admit I'm not feeling very welcome right now, and my point of view is neutral. IronKnuckle (talk) 15:51, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

If you take any criticism of your purely destructive 'contributions' here as a personal attack, you will feel that way. But you are plainly not neutral, and I frankly don't care if you can't tell reasoned criticism from a personal attack. AlexTiefling (talk) 16:01, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

They arent purely destructive, and for you to say so without evidence is quite foolish. IronKnuckle (talk) 16:04, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Fine. I've looked at your contributions listing. I can't find this non-destructive evidence you claim exists. Can you provide me with even a single diff, dated earlier than the time of this comment, where you edit a page in the main article space, other than to include or amend an AfD? AlexTiefling (talk) 16:08, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

I request you leave my page and stop editing on it. I request no more contact from you. IronKnuckle (talk) 16:14, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

You're free to delete my comments. I'll certainly be taking yours off my Talk page shortly. But you told me that there was no evidence that your contributions had been solely destructive. That looked like asking me to prove a negative, so I just asked you for a single confirming instance of your own claim. I'm not surprised you tried driving me away instead, but as you began this conversation, you should recognise the consequences of doing so. AlexTiefling (talk) 16:18, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

I requested no futher contact from you, yet you persist, I feel you are harassing me now. IronKnuckle (talk) 16:23, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Chameleon

Hello, Chameleon (film) has been overhauled. Can you please review the current revision as well as the comments at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Chameleon (film)? Thanks, Erik (talk | contribs) 16:25, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Yea I'm a bit tied up right now, being harassed by gun control supporters who dont like my AfD's. IronKnuckle (talk) 16:26, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Im about as far from a gun control supporter as you can get (I own an evil assault AR15!) but a decent number of your AFDs were meritless. Just beacuse we agree that certain people are idiots, does not mean that they aren't notable idiots. Gaijin42 (talk) 18:41, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Get rid of it, Gaijin. ExtenZe works just as well. Drmies (talk) 18:50, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Gaijin42, you sound like a very reasonable and smart man. IronKnuckle (talk) 13:17, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Oy vay...

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).

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

Request reason:

Why was I blocked for being a sockpuppet? A sock puppet of who? There is no proof of this, and the CheckUser said I was unrelated. I dont understand why I would be blocked for this. I have done nothing wrong. It it's already been proven I'm not a sock...

Decline reason:

Procedural decline as mooted - Sockpuppetry was stricken as a block rationale. Please re-request unblocking in a manner that addresses the revised block rationale posted below. UltraExactZZ ~ Did 17:32, 22 January 2013 (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.

No comment on the merits, but the checkuser result only says that your account is

Unrelated to a specific other account - not that you have not (or are not) socking. Checkuser searches are narrowly tailored to the question at hand - in this case, are you and Maydewsl the same editor? It did not check your account against all other accounts. UltraExactZZ ~ Did 17:31, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Well it was found that I was not socking. IronKnuckle (talk) 07:51, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Abuse of multiple accounts

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 36 hours for ~~abusing another account to influence the outcome of a deletion discussion (please see Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/IronKnuckle), and for~~ a general lack of competence regarding the interpretation of Misplaced Pages's guidelines on notability and personal attacks. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. De728631 (talk) 17:19, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Since checkuser has now proven that your account is not related to Maydewsl, I have struck that part from my reasoning for your block. However, your inability to interpret the notability guidelines and your false accusations of personal attacks have turned out to be disruptive, so I will keep the block. Please confirm another administrator that you have actually understood how Misplaced Pages works to be unblocked. De728631 (talk) 17:27, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Oh I understand how wikipedia works now. However my accusation was not false, and the proof is here:

- As long as you keep saying that your AfDs are opposed because the people opposing them are gun control advocates you will get nowhere. Not everything is political, and we try to run a clean shop. Drmies (talk) 18:29, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Is that why you allow people like Hullaballoo Wolfowitz to get away with blatant personal attacks? IronKnuckle (talk) 07:48, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Topic ban

I have closed the topic ban discussion at AN/I, where there is a clear consensus. You are prohibited from starting AfDs for 30 days, i.e. until after 21 February. During this period, please study Misplaced Pages:Deletion policy, Misplaced Pages:Neutral point of view and Misplaced Pages is not a soapbox. The strength and unanimity of the opposition to your actions should make it clear to you that your conduct was not acceptable; if you continue it, in particular if you raise more unjustified deletion proposals after the topic ban expires, you are likely to be indefinitely blocked. JohnCD (talk) 23:16, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Well I helped get one article redirected, so you're welcome for that. IronKnuckle (talk) 08:02, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Alright then

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

Request reason:

I should be unblocked because if I violated wikipedia's policy accidently in anyway I am sorry, you must know I am new here. Also I never personally attacked anyone. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz did call me idiotic?UNIQ500891f82a7c9d59-nowiki-0000004E-QINU?2?UNIQ500891f82a7c9d59-nowiki-0000004F-QINU? and that is a personal attack, and I had every right to let him know it was. IronKnuckle (talk) 7:35 am, Today (UTC+0)

Decline reason:

The sincerity of your apology is rather mitagated by the fact that you're continuing to try and defend your disruptive AFD nominations in the talkpage section below. It's clear that you still don't actually believe you did anything wrong, which leads me to conclude that unblocking you would not be in the best interests of the encyclopedia. Yunshui 雲‍水 09:35, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

And here is proof of Hullaballoo Wolfowitz's personal attack, it was uncalled for and yes he should be blocked for it, as I did already send him a warning for falsely calling me a sockpuppet.

I dont see why he should be allowed to personally attack people with impunity. IronKnuckle (talk) 07:38, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Please help me, I need a neutral admin's assistance! IronKnuckle (talk) 08:34, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Also my AfDs did help get some articles improved

Alot of those AfDs were legitimate AT the time of nomination, some had no sources at all. If enough reliable sources are added then yes it should be kept. But at the time there was none. IronKnuckle (talk) 07:41, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

In this circumstance, you should have improved the sourcing yourself, or provided a cleanup tag such as "{{refimprove}}". Deletion is a last resort. In one AfD, I found 20 sources in 10 seconds, and you should have been able to do similar. Ritchie333 07:55, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm blocked so I can't improve them. You wanna tell me this article is an acceptable article?: IronKnuckle (talk) 08:02, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

And how about this? Look how short it is! IronKnuckle (talk) 08:02, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

How about this? Only 4 sources? If she is notable, surely there is more than 4 sources to be used for that article... IronKnuckle (talk) 08:04, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

This article only has 2 sources! IronKnuckle (talk) 08:05, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Only 3 sources for this extremely short article... Cmon now... IronKnuckle (talk) 08:06, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

By the way, the standard advice to someone when they create a stub of an article is (besides being notable) to a) ensure it has 2 reliable sources, and b) ensure to tag it as part of a project. If it has those, then the editor is following normal process (✉→BWilkins←✎) 13:23, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

So yes, at least 5 outta 15, a 3rd of my AfDs were and still appear to be legit. IronKnuckle (talk) 08:08, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

I fail to see how any of your AFD nominations were "according to policy". WP:SOFIXIT and WP:BEFORE are your first line of action. The development of articles is everyone's responsibility first and foremost, including yours. There is zero proof that your nominations led to the improvement - improvement is the natural order of things, so please do not try to mistakenly take credit for them. Your actions - and continued actions - are 180 degrees against the concept of the Misplaced Pages community. Also, any unblock request that contains discussions of another's conduct are usually immediately declined - unblocks are about your behaviour (✉→BWilkins←✎) 09:38, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

You could have improved all of these articles before you got blocked - and indeed, had you done so you would probably not be here trying to contest blocking. Your AfD statistics clearly show 16 AfDs you started that were closed as "Speedy Keep" or "Speedy Close". This clearly shows the community has decided you have a lack of understanding of how AfD works. Ritchie333 10:09, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Some helpful words for ya..I too had an issues on wiki at one point, the thing that helped me understand how to work better here is that you have to bend over for consensus sometimes it really really sucks! Right now the consensus is that your AFD nominations were not in good faith or done in a misunderstanding of policy depending on which part of the discussion you read. I'd really suggest stopping trying to explain how you're right and try to understand how you can work according the the views of the community, because blind insistence in your methods will not work here at all. It will end in sanctions like the month long sanction from AFD. There was a fiasco that made it's way to Arbitration regarding the Speed of Light and myself and a couple of other editors had a clearly minority view about what was right in treatment and what was not, We ended up getting sanctioned prohibiting from "Advocacy" regarding that case. Was it the right thing to do I still don't think so but the reasoning behind this was that the community choose to see those things as disruptive, and we had to bend over for it..I'm going to leave it at that, you can choose to take that advise or choose to completely ignore it I just thought it might be helpful. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 11:12, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

And as far as the block goes, I'd just wait it out. It's a very short block and will expire shortly. I find anything short of contriteness in unblock seldom works. for example I was trying to appeal a block a few years back and explain why I was right and some block happy admin (He's not an admin anymore and I'm happy to have helped recall him for that reasons and some others) came and decided I hadn't had enough time to think about things and reset the blocks. The point of all this pontificating is that you can't win at this point...it sucks but it is what it is, just wait it out and try not to leave such a footprint..Hell In A Bucket (talk) 11:24, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Ok thank you for your advice Hell in a Bucket, you actually seem helpful. IronKnuckle (talk) 13:18, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Forgive my newness.

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

Request reason:

After a long tireless study of the AfD process, I understand the mistakes I have made with some AfDs and wish to be unblocked. I am new after all. IronKnuckle (talk) 13:19, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Firstly, you say that you "understand the mistakes have made", but you give no indication what you think the mistakes were, or how your editing would be different if unblocked. Secondly, it is clear that your only purpose here is to attempt to suppress content which is contrary to your political view. Misplaced Pages has no place for people who are here to try to promote a point of view, or, arguable even worse, to try to censor Misplaced Pages by removing an opposing point of view. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:08, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

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

Request reason:

Please forgive the mistakes I have made and unblock me, the mistakes I made were making AfDs that were premature, I'm sorry I didnt know. I am new and still learning. I have learned now. Second I am not trying to censor wikipedia, I am going to try to be more neutral in future edits. And I will respect the 30 day AfD ban. IronKnuckle (talk) 16:34, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Notes:

In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=Please forgive the mistakes I have made and unblock me, the mistakes I made were making AfDs that were premature, I'm sorry I didnt know. I am new and still learning. I have learned now. Second I am not trying to censor wikipedia, I am going to try to be more neutral in future edits. And I will respect the 30 day AfD ban. ] (]) 16:34, 23 January 2013 (UTC) |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=Please forgive the mistakes I have made and unblock me, the mistakes I made were making AfDs that were premature, I'm sorry I didnt know. I am new and still learning. I have learned now. Second I am not trying to censor wikipedia, I am going to try to be more neutral in future edits. And I will respect the 30 day AfD ban. ] (]) 16:34, 23 January 2013 (UTC) |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=Please forgive the mistakes I have made and unblock me, the mistakes I made were making AfDs that were premature, I'm sorry I didnt know. I am new and still learning. I have learned now. Second I am not trying to censor wikipedia, I am going to try to be more neutral in future edits. And I will respect the 30 day AfD ban. ] (]) 16:34, 23 January 2013 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

I personally think that some WP:ROPE is in order. Some people come in and make no waves while some other's belly flop, I'm inclined to support an unblock as a show of good faith and allow the user to grow within the wiki community. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 16:42, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Personally, I think that he should take your earlier advice: ride out the block. All of these unblock requests in close proximity are merely detracting from any argument, and if this most recent ill-advised one is unsuccessful it will likely lead to the locking of the talkpage. There's nothing above that is remotely WP:GAB-compliant, and I don't see an ounce of sincerity. If I was to act on it right now, that would be the result (✉→BWilkins←✎) 16:46, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

I appreciate that the checkuser evidence has disproved the sockpuppetry allegation, but i would be interested to know how it is that you were competent, on the first day that this account existed, to create an AfD page. It is not a skill normally exhibited by new editors.--Anthony Bradbury 20:52, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Category:

Requests for unblock