User talk:SanctimoniousDuplicitousBiters
Welcome![edit]
Hi SanctimoniousDuplicitousBiters! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.
As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:
Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.
If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:
If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.
Happy editing! I dream of horses (Contribs) Please notify me after replying off my talk page. Thank you. 13:08, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
January 2021[edit]
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.
SanctimoniousDuplicitousBiters (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I am blown away. Hear me out. DonkeyPunchResin was my account. The name didn't fit into any of the categories of disruptive or offensive usernames when I made it and years later it still didn't as evidenced by that fact that in the two or three years I had that account not a single editor cared in the slightest about my name. Not in the least. And why would they? The slang donkey punch comes from the phrase donkey punch which comes from people who grew up around donkeys and lived in fear of a spine snapping backwards donkey kick (also known as a donkey punch). I can say donkey punch in church back home no problem. The name is a childhood joke that had nothing untoward associated with it till I was instabanished. The only time when a username can be instabanished per Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention is for obvious and serious violations only. Furthermore wiki policy is to "Give constructive users a chance. Except in extreme cases, when an editor has an obvious username violation but is otherwise constructive, give them a chance to change or abandon their name before blocking. We do not want to drive promising editors away." I came home drunk one night and made a few stupid edits and apologized and the other user said it was ok but maybe don't do that and I thanked the user and that was that. One time. Other than that I contributed. Citations, typos, I had even started doing a few edits patrolling the recent changes page and was trying to get more involved doing the not so much fun work. But I shouldn't have made those edits. I'm sorry. I can apologize to the other user again if you'd like. Anyways, back to the WP:BADNAME we don't consider leaving well enough alone. We don't talk to the user. We don't request a comment. We don't assume the slightest of glimpses of good faith, and in fact we act very much in bad faith, and we not only banish the user but we block his ip from so much as creating a new account for a week. So I make a new account. The other accounts have a total of one main space edit and it was fine. And clearly I should've revealed that I was in fact DPR (btw the initial RFC I did on Trump/Demagogue is a great example about how no one cared or even noticed that username ... other great examples include everything else ever related to that account) but I was a little bit salty and having learned the rules are actually pretty bendy I couldn't resist taking my shiny new username out for a spin. And I didn't do anything that shouldn't have happened anyways. Today is a perfect example of a growing problem in wikiworld. Increasingly admins and long time editors are using wikipedia in destructive ways. Obliterating potential contributors and anyone else who can't hang with their writings on reality. All leading to a more insular project with less diversity and Dunning-Krugered consensuses. User:Srich32977, an all time top tier editor, is called out for an egregious policy violation, he then lays out some of that sweet sweet sanctimonious duplicity about the importance of following wikipedia policy. Tasty. He doubles down on the violation, boldly going for the coverup and shuts down the investigation. Parties over kids. You'll just have to find another way. So anyways I spend a few hours putting together an RFC and comment as thoughtfully as I can and no sooner do I finish than I find out User:Srich32977 put the secret police on me and I've been banned again. These Sanctimonious. Duplicitous. Biters. SanctimoniousDuplicitousBiters (talk) 19:57, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Oh come off it. GrabEmByTheDick, etc. Make your request from your original account and stop trolling. Yamla (talk) 20:09, 24 January 2021 (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.
(block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.