User talk:An Argento Fan

Dario Argento

Hello, I hope that you'll be able to insert the new image soon. Regarding your revert, I noticed that the headline In the 1990s is back on its old position. The thing is, the section starts with a longer paragraph about the 1987 movie Opera. Which is somehow odd, as you would expect this section to deal with the 1990s, and not with a movie from the mid of the 1980s. Would you mind finding a solution to this or putting the headline back where I had put it? Thank you. --Catgut (talk) 00:07, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, yes, I split up the section "Later years" into those two sections "In the 1990s" and "21st century" so that the two free images could be best used. More appropriate section titles would be much better. Maybe descriptive of the kinds of work he was doing then and then. I figure as the Dario Argento article improves, lengthens, something will work out. But for the moment I changed the section title to "From the late 1980s and through the 1990s." As for the free image, the Graphic Lab will probably take a few days to work on it, and then it can be used. If it really is necessary to have something in the Infobox in the intermediary then I guess the uncropped version of the third and latest free image from Wikimedia commons could be used. But I think we can wait?-An Argento Fan (talk) 05:01, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. I've seen the image, and it's going to look great in the infobox. Thanks for improving the article! --Catgut (talk) 21:58, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. A small improvement. It's actually a pretty interesting article already.-An Argento Fan (talk) 02:21, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Is Google Making Us Stupid?

Your comments on the above FAC appears to admit that this account is a sockpuppet of banned editor User:Manhattan Samurai. Therefore, I have blocked this account indefinitely. If this is not the case, please indicate why not using the {{unblock|reason}} template. Black Kite 11:36, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

You have been blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet of Manhattan Samurai (talk · contribs · global contribs · page moves · user creation · block log). Blocked or banned users are not allowed to edit Wikipedia; if you are banned, all edits under this account may be reverted.

If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal the block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.

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).

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

Request reason:

I've become notorious. Well, at least I got a little bit of work done. More than I can say for most of you intent on discovering me anew.

Decline reason:

Your request to be unblocked is declined because it does not address the reason for your block or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince administrators either (a) that the block was made in error or (b) that the block is no longer necessary because you understand what you are blocked for, you will not do it again and you will make productive contributions instead. Please read our guide to appealing blocks for more information. — Aitias // discussion 13:27, 8 February 2009 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

Hi. Could someone do a checkuser on me? I think they should be able to unearth a few more sock puppets now that I've unearthed this account. Anyhow, I understand why I was blocked. It was for disruptive behavior and occasional trolling. But I think the most important thing atm is to find all my sock puppets. Leave no sock unturned. Sincerely, An Argento Fan (talk) 13:45, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

No reason to unblock given. --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 13:57, 8 February 2009 (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.

Hi. Thank you for considering my comments, however, I don't think you fully addressed them. Sincerely, An Argento Fan (talk) 14:00, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Checkuser

{{help me}} Hello: Can you please alert someone about performing a checkuser on my account? Or could you explain to me how I could go about getting that done? Sincerely, An Argento Fan (talk) 14:04, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NOTE: Who the hell is User:Closeness? That's not one of mine. An Argento Fan (talk) 14:10, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Checkuser is not, and will not performed for name clearing. — neuro^(talk) 14:17, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Name clearing? I am not User:Closeness and have many other accounts I would like to finally have unearthed. These sock puppets need to be dealt with.An Argento Fan (talk) 14:18, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh right, you're one of those. Checkusers aren't done upon self-request. Having sockpuppets isn't an achievement either. Continue with this and your talk page will no doubt become uneditable to you. — neuro^(talk) 14:22, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]