User talk:Scarletspeedster7

Image on your userpage
Hi, you're not allowed to use fair use images on your userpage, so please stop reverting BJBot. Thanks. --Closedmouth (talk) 13:00, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Review #2

 * Please excuse me for "butting in" but even when in a dispute, that doesn't mean you lose your control. Maintain a civil attitude. Comments like this make me disturbed and make us more unlikely to unblock you. Saying you "despise wikipedians" is another reason to keep you blocked. You cannot expect to continue editing here with an immature and hot-temper; we appreciate those who have patience and are willing to take criticism. I for one make mistakes sometimes and I thank users that correct me. That's how you grow in life, that's how you grow as a wikipedia editor. Hope you turn over and are able to contribute with a more light-hearted spirit. Blessings and Peace,  Schnitzel  MannGreek . 00:46, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I really appreciate what you said. You're right.  I shouldn't have such a hot temper.  However, do you see where I am coming from?  No one gives anyone the time of day to explain anything.  That's just wrong.  There should be something said for compassion.  However, I see where I am in the wrong.  In the future, I will dispute things with a much more civil tone. Scarletspeedster7 (talk) 00:55, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * That's what I like to see. Thanks, If I were an administrator, I would unblock you. However, if you could tell that in your unblock request, you might have a chance. I'll try to supprt you and Assumme Good Faith;) Blessings, Schnitzel  MannGreek . 00:58, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I need you to show clearly to the other users that you are truely willing to edit constructively. They have suspicion and I don't blame them. But I am trusting you. Leave your reply under this. I will be your mentor and keep a watch over you in case you need help. And I will make sure you don't revert back to former ways. Regards, Schnitzel  MannGreek . 01:18, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Review #4
Schnitze Mann Greek, is there anything else I can do? I feel pretty much sandbagged at every turn. I have not vandalized any articles. All information I have posted has been accompanied with a source. I find it insulting that they would assume I'm just saying what you want to hear. I am saying simply what I mean. Scarletspeedster7 (talk) 17:34, 1 July 2009 (UTC) To all other users: unless you have any helpful and politely written suggestions to help me, then just please refrain from posting here, as I will most likely just remove it. Thank you. Scarletspeedster7 (talk) 17:39, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Review #5

 * Most people think that having three independent editors review your request is sufficient; you have had four independent reviews. In order to avoid using excess time as more admins are pulled to this talk page, I've protected this talk page for two weeks. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 17:57, 1 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Let's amend that. This is a block-evading sockpuppet of User:Scarletspeed7, who, just after this page was locked down, requested unblocking to edit the same kinds of articles, and claiming that he hadn't edited in a long time.  I no longer think it is a remotely good idea to unblock this user in a couple of weeks.  Mango juice talk 03:11, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi. I've fixed your unblock template. Remember, 2 brackets are used for every template. And I'll support you for your unblock request because you seem like that you want to change and edit in good faith. Pinkgirl 19:35, 18 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Before we consider unblock you will have to convince us that you are not the same editor as Scarletspeed7. If you are this editor then on this page you are a block-evading sockpuppet, and an idefinite block is wholly appropriate. --Anthony.bradbury"talk" 19:58, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm telling the absolute truth that I'm not Scarletspeedster7's sockpuppet. Pinkgirl 22:12, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

It is really interesting and thought-provoking, Pinkgirl, that you should answer my last post, which was clearly addressed to Scarletspeedster7, using this account name. --Anthony.bradbury"talk" 11:51, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Review #6
Why did make this unblock request? still has access to his/her talk page to make unblock requests him/herself. Vicenarian (T · C) 20:24, 22 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Also, why did JohnELocke do this? Vicenarian  (T · C) 20:29, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Like I said in the unblock request, I used this other profile because I was blocked from making edits to even my talk page. At least, it says that I cannot edit from that page. JohnELocke (talk) 20:33, 22 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Nope. The block log would say "cannot edit own talk page." Vicenarian  (T · C) 20:35, 22 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Strange. It wouldn't let me a few minutes ago.  Thanks for the heads up. Scarletspeedster7 (talk) 20:38, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Review #7

 * Now, I am a little annoyed by this decline. I told you already why the sock was necessary.  i could not edit my talk page, and I had waited the alloted amount of time and wished to make an unblock request like before.  Does anyone actually consider this requests seriously?  Does it strike you as odd that someone would keep trying to get unblocked over and over if they didn't want to help?  The sockpuppet has been explained.  It was a desperate measure.  Why doesn't anyone ever help someone else?  Does anyone even consider the new words put up on this page?  Please someone seriously help me out here!  I'm dyin over here!  Scarletspeedster7 (talk) 20:53, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

We see four editors trying to get you unblocked; Scarletspeed7, Scarletspeedster7, Pinkgirl and JohnELocke. You should understand that creating a sock to bypass a block is in itself a blockable procedure. How many of these users are in fact yourself? --Anthony.bradbury"talk" 20:58, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Of course Scarletspeedster7 is me. Scarletspeed7 was mine a long time ago, but I had forgotten the password. JohnELocke, as stated above, was created because for some reason, it wouldn't allow me to edit my page.  That was created for that reason only as stated previously and publicly.  It was a borderline tactic, but I felt necessary to make my unblock request and was confident that as I was openly stating that was a sockpuppet, people would be somewhat more forgiving.  Pinkgirl is not me.  I have no idea who that is. Please feel free to ask any other questions you feel need adressing.  Scarletspeedster7 (talk) 21:01, 22 July 2009 (UTC)


 * JohnELocke was created yesterday. You did not openly declare it as a sockpuppet. It was only revealed by a vigilant editor who noticed you forging signatures and requesting unblocks in "other people's" names. – B.hotep •talk• 21:07, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * And seven block reviews is not taking it seriously? Come on... – B.hotep •talk• 21:08, 22 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Again, you have not read all of the material. WHen someone pointed out the weird edit hiccup, I fixed it. I also stated point blank in the unblock request (read it, you will see it plain as day) that that was a sockpuppet created to make an edit. It says so right there. Yes, I created yesterday, I didn't have time to make the unblock request, so I did it today. I still stated it right out front. Just because I chose to leave work at the proper time and not make the edit I was going to make yesterday today, doesn't mean I am some sort of ill-conceived vandal. Scarletspeedster7 (talk) 21:12, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

And you want to talk about NOT taking it seriously? I obviously am! I want to be unblocked! What else can I do? I have no other options! I want to be unblocked and help edit! The only way to do that? Be unblocked! I made two unblock requests in the last 20 days, one of which was simply an addendum adressing something brought up inthe previous unblock request. Look at yourself! Do you think that you're giving me a chance? I have been asking for a chance for a long long time. I have been trying to get this darn thing unblocked and go back to the way things are supposed to be, sans the rude edits I made and the picture thing I did. That's all I want. Scarletspeedster7 (talk) 21:12, 22 July 2009 (UTC)


 * For your information, I had just contacted the admin who blocked you to suggest a review, and found you continuing to edit through your sock on matters wholly unrelated to your block. I do not think that I personally would ever consider an unblock in this situation. --Anthony.bradbury"talk" 21:22, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Well thanks for that budding support of me. You can't make me give up. If I can't edit, then what choice do I have? I want to be a part of the editing that I was in the past. Eevryone's so focused on the smallest of details, and I just wish people could recognize the effort here in trying to repair an error. No matter how many people continue to beat me down, it will not discourage me. I'll be here every day, defending my position, hoping for the chance to at least receive some sort of probationary allowances. Scarletspeedster7 (talk) 21:28, 22 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Besides JohnELocke, this person has created User:BoosterBoosterBoosterGold, User:WallyWest3 and User:DavisLove3. Today. Not a while ago. Today. --jpgordon:==( o ) 21:29, 22 July 2009 (UTC)


 * That was not me. This is a shared IP.  A company IP.  I do not know who those are. Scarletspeedster7 (talk) 21:30, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, you've admitted you're JohnELocke, and those other accounts were created within a minute of JohnELocke's first edit to this page, so, basically, you're nailed. That will be all. --jpgordon:==( o ) 21:35, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Those three accounts were created at 20.07, 20.08 and 20.09 today. You are lying. Go away. --Anthony.bradbury</b><sup style="color:black;">"talk" 21:38, 22 July 2009 (UTC)


 * This request appears to have been made by ScienceGolfFanatic, pretending to be a sock of Scarlet. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 17:55, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

The above edit was made by this account, not the IP address, which is a shared IP by over 3000 people (University of Oklahoma). Blacklantern2814 (talk) 00:36, 18 December 2009 (UTC) In an interest for full disclosure, this user is also one of my former sockpuppets. User:Ashtongotpunkd Hopefully this will be seen as an act of good faith. Blacklantern2814 (talk) 00:53, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I may not be an all-knowing Wikipedian, but I do realize that you can't make anything better by making another sockpuppet (this I know, since the only two edits that it made is to this page) to make yourself look good. I very highly doubt that you will be granted an unblock, even if you wait a year.--Iner22 (talk) 04:34, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. I will try this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.184.44.82 (talk) 22:06, 30 June 2010 (UTC)