User talk:Arma virumque cano

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).

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

Request reason:

I have remembered my past username is "User:Lambchop"; however I forgot the password (I was also hassled under that username for being a sockpuppet). I am also willing to follow any behavior improvements, though I need a logical and cogent explanation of what is wrong and how to improve

Decline reason:

Hooey. You created a bunch of sockpuppets at the same time as you created this account; did you think we wouldn't check? Go away and stop wasting our time. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 01:41, 25 May 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).

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

Request reason:

Those aren't mine, i saw a friend had it and i wanted it because it is a cool username. im also willing to rat him out in exchange for unblock. pleez unblock this is my only account i am not greedy i have only one i will be very sad if im not unblocked im sorry for any grievances i caused but i wasn't even warned nor told what i had done wrong i will redress any grievances in the future

Decline reason:

I can't find any evidence that unblocking you would make the encyclopedia better. In fact, it seems, from your contribution history, that leaving you blocked will be better for the encyclopedia. FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 01:53, 25 May 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).

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

Request reason:

I want a clear explanation of what "harm" i caused and why what i did was bad. again, i have information that can prevent disruption of this project as explained above; please feel free to ask any questions before processing this request.

Decline reason:

Per Jpgordon--anyone who creates multiple accounts in a short period of time makes it hard to assume good faith. Talk page turned off.Blueboy 96 04:52, 25 May 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.

No, let's do it the other way around. Why don't you provide the diffs of five edits you made that significantly improved the encyclopedia? -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 02:06, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can't say that any one edit made a huge improvement.. but here is some diffs to refute claim that i disrupt afds: [1] [2] I voted Keep because Cash Taxes does seem like an important concept, we all pay taxes after all, and the court case did seem notable after further review. As the diff shows, I do reason when approached, i don't just vote indiscriminately. I promise to make better edits. My delete votes just reflect the fact that I am a deletionist, which many other people are. Also turned to speedy deletion work so that I would make less people mad because i really do want to make improvements, and the essay was a humorous addressing of a valid serious issue. But there is one thing i just don't understand... why is everyone so hostile to me :'( Arma virumque cano (talk) 02:13, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

how is posting "im not a crook" all over the place improving the encyclopedia exactly? Nar Matteru (talk) 03:27, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It was an inside joke, harmless really. anyways I really am sorry if i pissed anyone off its just that no one has told me what i did wrongArma virumque cano (talk) 03:39, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

there's a difference between an inside joke and a joke shared between the many residents inside your own head Nar Matteru (talk) 05:21, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Repeatedly posting inane messages is generally frowned upon. --t'shael mindmeld 03:58, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Given some of the edits you've been making while logged out, I'm very happy for you to stay blocked. --Deskana, Champion of the Frozen Wastes 21:56, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe an easy way is to check the IP of the blocked user to see if it could be him. Eurovision 2009 and 2010^{Sasha Son}_{Sakis Rouvas} 11:44, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry case

Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Arma virumque cano for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. — Jeff G. ツ 00:39, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]