User talk:L'Utente anonimo

≠→″

L'Utente anonimo, you are invited to the Teahouse!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_personal_attacks#What_is_considered_to_be_a_personal_attack.3F (Where do I fall in to that category?) Am I making homophobic, racist comments or issuing death threats against Matthew hk? Am I threatening legal action against this individual am I actually doing anything which can be seen as threatening and/or violent towards this user. The answer is NO!!! So why am I being questioned on here?

July 2015
Hello, I'm Oshwah. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/PabloOsvaldo17— because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   17:33, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Not constructive, it is a violation of my user rights! I have clearly been blocked by an incompetent user User:GiantSnowman an admin that loves blocking everybody on here as I have seen the amount of users they have blocked. The reason this is a violation of my rights is because of this (please read, User:Oshwah)

"Blocks are used to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, not to punish users (see Purpose and goals below). Any user may report disruption and ask administrators to consider blocking a disruptive account or IP address (see Requesting blocks)." My disruptive editing involved trying to clean up some association football articles on the site. Also I have been blocked without warning which must be in violation of Wiki rights and here is why.

"Blocking is different from banning, a formal retraction of editing privileges on all or part of Wikipedia. Blocks disable a user's ability to edit pages; bans do not. However, users who are subject to a total ban, or who breach the terms of a partial ban, will most likely be blocked to enforce the ban." This is not true at all, because I can't edit articles thanks to GiantSnowman. I may as well be banned because that is how I feel I am being treated on here.

Blocks should not be punitive[edit]

See also: Wikipedia:Sanctions against editors are not punishment

Policy shortcuts: WP:BLOCKNOTPUNITIVE WP:NOPUNISH

Blocks should not be used: 1.in retaliation against users; 2.to disparage other users; 3.as punishment against users; 4.or where there is no current conduct issue of concern.

Blocks should be preventative[edit]

Policy shortcuts: WP:BLOCKPREVENTATIVE WP:BLOCKDETERRENT GiantSnowman is punishing me, despite the text below explaining that it shouldn't be a punitive block!

Blocks should be used to: 1.prevent imminent or continuing damage and disruption to Wikipedia; 2.deter the continuation of present, disruptive behavior; 3.and encourage a more productive, congenial editing style within community norms.

Deterrence is based upon the likelihood of repetition. For example, though it might have been justifiable to block an editor a short time ago, such a block may no longer be justifiable right now, particularly if the actions have since ceased or the conduct issues have been resolved.

User:Mattythewhite
Please can you help me! I am sorry if the likes of User:Struway2 and User:GiantSnowman think I am abusing multiple accounts, it's just that I get frustrated and don't appreciate being blocked repeatedly after a while. The two users I have mentioned absolutely despise me and want rid of me from the encyclopedia altogether, although Stru claims that he thought I was editing with good intentions, now I am only doing certain things because Wikipedia is supposed to source fairly accurate facts and information on various different subjects but if you'll look at User:Matthew hk's grammar (and I am not a grammar expert, but I am always striving to improve) unlike Mr hk and because I am voicing my discontent GiantSnowman and Stru thought quickly to send out another block in my direction. I am sorry for my past mistakes and only want to edit these articles because otherwise they are not fit for submission. Thank you for your time.
 * You were previously blocked for disruptive editing and uncivil behaviour towards other editors. You have now been blocked (repeatedly) for evading that first block using new accounts, which is not allowed. You have the potential to be a good editor, with some guidance, but you need to prove it - I suggest you take a break from Wikipedia for 6 months, in which time you should not edit from any account (named or anonymous IP address) - then come back and request an unblock. The circumstances around your first block happen to lots of other editors, who often come back and edit with no problems i.e. that is not the end for you. What could be the end for you - and even result in a site ban - is the constant sockpuppetry. GiantSnowman 19:33, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Have you looked at why I was blocke ofd? Hang on though, why have I been blocked today? Also why did you delete an article I was creating and while you speak about how I can be a good editor why is it that hk is never questioned about things? Also there's nothing wrong with creating new accounts so long as I don't make an account with the intention of directing abuse towards others. I've seen the Wiki blocking page.
 * You were orignally blocked as PabloOsvaldo17 for disruptive editing; your drafts have been deleted per WP:DENY; your subsequent accounts have been blocked per WP:SOCK. GiantSnowman 12:00, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Congrats GiantSnowman you have successfully demonstrated why you are UNFIT to be an administrator, tisk tisk. Removing up-to-date information on Ryder Matos (yes in case you haven't heard he is on loan at Carpi for the season from Fiorentina) but you already knew that didn't you!? You would have noticed the tag which was 100% reliable and took you to the Carpi FC page where the loan claim was validated but being an ignorant pig-headed person you'd rather delete edits just to prove a point, well there you have it now how does that look to visitors of the site when they see that Ryder Matos is at Carpi but you consistently reverted the information to a no longer supported time. Such a fabulous editor, shove your skills up your arse mate! Oh and you that stupid message which says "Wikipedia is made by people like you", well Wikipedia is fucking ruined by tyrants and cretins like yourself! I don't give a shit about hypocrites like you, with no care in the fucking world about the Matthew hk (god sake he does a pretty good job with references but screws up with grammar. Fuck that is what you are saying, if he wants to make new articles that are un-fucking readable then that's fine by Snowy. Oh best blocked that other guy for actually caring about grammar but because he can be abusive I must be a cunt and revert edits that I shouldn't be reverting because of WP:DENY which is bollocks anyway because the other day you said the words "can be a decent editor" but now before the swearing match you place that stupid fucking tag on my talk page (whereby you are effectively branding me a troll). Did it ever occur to you that mine and some others' behavior is down to the immediate harsh treats from you admins and that we care and you couldn't give a toss about Wikipedia's article quality standards but will preach what's right and wrong according to the shite that comes out of your mouth. Yeah such a friendly place Wikipedia is with admins blocking and scaring off other users, yet when register an account we don't hear a word from you, but as soon as we over-step the line well immediately blocking and constant surveillance of our respected talk pages. What are you a fucking spy, gees if you get paid to be a low-life prick for this stupid fucking project you are sad and yes I have been editing a lot but what can I say Wikipedia interested me!

Facebook will know (people browse)

Good day, motherfucker!


 * I have reverted your edits per WP:DENY and blocked your IPs per WP:SOCK - and will continue to do so. The more you continue down this route, the harder it will be for you to return to normal editing. GiantSnowman 15:44, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

See always with the unwanted responses, nothing about the daily corruption on here including your ridiculous reverts to something that didn't need reverting! Mate, one thing you're forgetting is that whether I am being abusive towards you now or not is besides the point because before this abuse I was wrongfully blocked anyway as you thought you could tell me that I can't make new accounts but I can because as long as you don't create an account for the sole purpose of abusing others and/or manipulating articles on here there is no reason why an individual cannot create a new account. So if I do create a new account, I am expecting you to stay away unless I swear or hurdle abuse at someone if not you're even more corrupt and untrustworthy than I previously thought.

Give me a normal human response and not a Wiki-cyborg lecture

Also, when do you plan on doing the right thing and editing the Ryder Matos / other articles back? You do realise that Wikipedia now contains more inaccurate info again after this

Gone quiet now? Snowy? No Goal.com now, have Wikipedia explained about this on Facebook ... fuck have they and it was partly orchestrated by you and your cronies. Another thing which makes literally no sense is that you said about leaving Wiki for six months and then asking to be unblocked but you as well as I know that my unblock request would be declined so what on earth are you talking about!? Besides if I turned in six months and just so happened to be unblocked wouldn't I have you sticking your ore in again?

Finally, you've no idea who I am ... I am most certainly not a troll or vandal and I am definitely not a nasty person, but you have pushed all of my buttons which has made me react and I just don't believe that you care about freedom of speech and user rights on here. Why must you blocked everybody. Imagine if a criminal was given no trial and just sentenced, it just does not happen in Europe in the 21 century. Law has probation, why doesn't Wiki? If you have check users that are able to quickly determine a ip address and make the link with a blocked user, why not have check users analysing data and only blocking that user as a last resort or whatever. If a user was continually monitored then if they did throw that final chance away then you'd begin the removing their access and/or every trace of their existence on Wikipedia. User:GiantSnowman

How are you studying law when you don't understand how Wikipedia works?


 * The last thing I will say to you - if you continue to rant and rave and throw accusations and conspiracies around, the less likely people are to take you seriously. Regarding your talk of free speech and law and trials, see WP:FREESPEECH. If you continue to evade your blocks, the less likely you are to ever be unblocked, see WP:SOCK. When I mentioned 6 months, that was not me plucking a random timescale out of my head, see WP:OFFER. If you can last 6 months without editing I will be happy to start a discussion regarding your unblock (as PabloOsvaldo17, your original account) on the administrator's noticeboard and I will remain neutral i.e. not express an opinion on your unblock request either way. However if you cannot/will not see that constantly evading your block (again, you need to read WP:SOCK!) is not allowed then it is highly unlikely that any unblock request would succeed. Goodbye, and hope to see you in 6 months (and not before). GiantSnowman 16:21, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, from as far as I know you can give me that Goal.com link and I will try to insert it for you. I don't think that will contradict with any of our policies. Also, fill free to drop me a note on my anonymous talkpage and give me Skype or e-mail so that I can help you with your unblock. I hope I will see you soon!--184.97.185.44 (talk) 21:44, 30 January 2016 (UTC)