User talk:Basedircrory

September 2012[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one of your recent edits has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Ultra Brite was changed by Basedircrory (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.963122 on 2012-09-25T01:27:22+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 01:27, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Basedircrory, you are invited to the Teahouse[edit]

Hi Basedircrory! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Please join other people who edit Wikipedia at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space on Wikipedia where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. We hope to see you there!

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your friendly neighborhood HostBot (talk) 01:50, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GNAA[edit]

Do you care to discuss your reasons for spelling out GNAA in the template? —Cupco 18:17, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cupco. I respect your wish to be discrete about the gnaa but I find that wikipedia is not the place for censorship. I suspect that youre a sockpuppet of selery who was banned. Basedircrory (talk) 20:32, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Per Template talk:Hacking_in_the_2010s and that template's history and the fact that you've only made a few edits, none of which are particularly constructive, I suspect you are a sockpuppet of the GNAA member who has been making the identical changes to that template. —Cupco 20:49, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

brohoof[edit]

Brohoof! Maractus (talk) 23:48, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dualus SPI[edit]

Having previously spent a considerable amount of time poring over this person's contributions from a long list of accounts and IP addresses, I am pretty familiar with the relevant patterns of behavior and content. I agree with your conclusions here. Let me know if you want help writing the SPI. --Amble (talk) 23:09, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I can't really supervise -- I'm just a regular editor, who happened to go through the same procedure recently. But I can lend a hand. I think your evidence is good so far. I'm adding a mention of the dark matter-related edits by the IP, as those are a dead giveaway. --Amble (talk) 06:59, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I took the liberty of adding the checkuser and checkip templates at the SPI page. --Amble (talk) 07:09, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

October 2012[edit]

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

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).

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

Request reason:

Please include the original unblock request.

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. Max Semenik (talk) 23:20, 6 October 2012 (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.