User talk:The Greater Pumpkin

Welcome![edit]

Hello, The Greater Pumpkin, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Geology of Somerset. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! — Rod ^talk 20:01, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. We'll see how long it lasts. It doesn't seem to be a very friendly and inviting place from what I have seen....very hostile!The Greater Pumpkin (talk) 20:02, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Have you had bad experiences? I saw you revert some vandalism and it was just one of many vandal edits wikipedia gets each day, however it gets even more useful edits and I have found most people helpful/approachable especially if you ask for help/advice.— Rod ^talk 20:06, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have been lurking for a long time. Just haven't been overly impressed by the conduct of some people here. No offense to you, you seem to be doing a fine job. Frankly, I don't expect to be here long but we'll see, maybe I will be wrong. Let me know if you see any edits of mine that are problematic. The Greater Pumpkin (talk) 20:13, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I saw you undo vandalism at Lincoln–Kennedy coincidences urban legend. Thanks! Coincidentally, I also remove "also" where it's pointless. And I recently referenced The Great Pumpkin as the pinnacle of effective puppetry in an apparently exclusionary political system. If you turn out to be better at it, I'd recommend keeping this alias. And if not, I appreciate the effort. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:17, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

March 2016[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.

Gamaliel (talk) 19:09, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Gamaliel and Courcelles: You know, everytime you delete content, revert mychanges or restore vandalism just because it's me, you are proving my point about abusive admin conduct and many admins not being here to improve the project. Policy states that positive changes can and should be kept, so removing them is just plain vandalism no matter how you justify it. Oh and I am going to continue to contribute to this project regardless of how many times you revert my changes or block accounts. I should not have been banned in the first place. The ban was done and is being maintained by manipulation of policy to silence a critic, that is all it has ever been about and I am going to continue to invoke IAR and improve the project for years to come regardless of whether you want me to or not. This ban and retributory conduct towards me will never be effective. Cheers! The Greater Pumpkin (talk) 19:15, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@GeneralizationsAreBad: Nothing against you but you are not on the right side. You might think you are trying to help, but you are only helping people who do not care about the project or policy and only want to protect their ability to do whatever they want to do, as admins, because they know that no one will do anything. The Greater Pumpkin (talk) 19:17, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There are plenty of loud critics on Wikipedia who have not been silenced, so your claim is unconvincing. Nevertheless, we would be glad to assist you in appealing your ban through the proper channels.Gamaliel (talk) 19:22, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Believe it or not, that's up to you and I have repeatedly submitted to the Arbcom (those emails and contacts go completely ignored) and all attempts in the past to come to an agreement have not been fulfilled because some people keep finding petty reasons to keep the block in place or just manipulate the outcome. So, if you want to unban my account, you have my complete pemission to do so and I will be happy to edit only with that account. The only reason I continue to create new accounts, and will continue to do so, is because I am going to continue to build an encyclopedia as I have done for the last 10 years and I am not going to honor a ban that never should have been in the first place.

I do not however take you offer seriously though based on my experiences with you and the members of the Arbcom in the past but feel free to prove me wrong.

BTW, if you do a blanket revert you are going to restore a lot of vandalism I reverted. Also, I will continue to revert any positive changes you revert as vandalism, because that's what it is when you revert changes that improve the project, its vandalism and that reflects disruption and someone who is not here to build an encyclopedia. I will gladly collaborate with anyone who is here to build an encyclopedia, but if you're not here for that, then I will revert you as a vandal as well. Cheers! The Greater Pumpkin (talk) 19:28, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Other than blocking your socks this week, I do not recall any past experiences with you. Nor can I find any emails from you sent to the Committee during my tenure there, which has only been since January. If I missed one, please feel free to resend. Gamaliel (talk) 19:41, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well I do, you voted Support on my ban in the past based on faulty reasons. I also remember working with you several times over the years when I edited under my Kumioko account before my ban was started. I never had a problem with you back then. But if your only reasons for vandalizing my contributions is that I was banned by people who don't care about the project or policy, then I have to be honest and say I don't have much respect for that decision.

So as I said above, I'd be glad to edit under my account if its unblocked but either way I am going to continue to edit because I believe in this project and have been dedicated towards building it for the last 10 years. I have no intentions of stopping regardless of the desire of a vocal minority to create a disruption to accuse me of.The Greater Pumpkin (talk) 19:46, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As I stated there, I am not familiar with the circumstances of your initial ban. As a result, I will consider any ban appeal without prejudice or anger. Here you make vague allusions that you were banned by unnamed people conspiring against you. I have no idea who those people are, but I am certainly in a position to take appropriate action against anyone who has committed wrongdoing against you. But since have declared you will not abide by policy and you refuse to appeal the ban through proper channels, I do not see any way out of this situation for you unless you are willing to change your behavior and act in a manner consistent with policy and the norms of this community and project. Since you will not appeal your ban I am going to remove talk page access for you. Any further comments can be sent to arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org. Gamaliel (talk) 19:55, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]