Wikipedia talk:Requests for checkuser/Case/ColourWolf

ColourWolf Sockpuppetry and Uncyclopedia
I see with amusement how hard you argued against the decision of turning Uncyclopedia into a FA-class article. Why? Supposedly because the vandal ColourWolf was from Uncyclopedia. When did User:ColourWolf and his gallant list of sockpuppets ever explicitly claimed they were from Uncyclopedia? You just made an assumption and lumped the majority of Uncyclopedia editors with ColourWolf. Truth is, ColourWolf is NOT from Uncyclopedia! He doesn't even have an account there! You wasted your time arguing against Uncyclopedia, and you probably still have a LOOONNNNNNG way from becoming an Wikipedia Administrator - All because of your impetuous attitude.

You were just lucky that you found the star article, Bookworm Short Stories (Which by the way, existed, just not in the way User:Elemental of Truth wrote) thanks to the help of the Adminstrators who found out about User:KalarWuff. I have edited three more articles, laced with my beautiful stories and waiting for you to find. However, you may stand a chance of becoming an Administrator in the near future if you managed to find all three of them within 72 hours (I will be back to check on 28th March 2008). Good luck, Admin-Wannabe.

Oh yeah, if you and your list of Truth-allies can't find these articles and revert them back to normal, I'll return to show you a website that shows how poor Wikipedia manages obscure articles - Thus of the need to DELETE THEM ALL.

P.S: Go on and delete this message and block me for being another sockpuppet, Arbiteroftruth. Zero of any heroes (talk) 09:48, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

FINAL message by "ScumWolf"/"JianLang"
Again, Mr Arbiteroftruth, this impetuous attitude of yours made you unsuitable for the job of an Admin at Wikipedia. These are your claims you made to administrators, that I am going to massively vandalize other pages if you fail to stop me in 72 hours. What bullshit.

Where's the proof? I said NOTHING of that sort. Administrators, read carefully my messages I posted to the talk page of User:Arbiteroftruth (Now shifted to that stupid "JianLang" archives of his, and do not just assume that User:Arbiteroftruth had just spoken the truth. He wants to be an Administrator, and yet the impetuousness of his is going to get an innocent person accused of an offence/crime someday. I only said that I'll return in three days to show you guys a website on how weak Wikipedia manages obscure articles. I did NOT say that I am going to MASSIVELY VANDALIZE WIKIPEDIA AND MAKE THEM SORRY!

Here's the website:. Other news websites are saying the same thing as well. I don't understand why Wikipedians are so unwilling to delete un-notable, obscure articles (Like those on Singapore's Chinese Dramas), when they have potential of containing false information which few would find out.

To prevent User:Arbiteroftruth from spreading further rumours and speculations, it is here that I, User:ColourWolf and my list of sockpuppets, shall officially announce that I/We will no longer introduce hoaxes amongst Singapore articles. As a sign of my good faith I have reverted the remaining of my hoax edits, which shows that nobody notices/bothers about them for nearly a month, which proves that these articles should be nominated for deletion.

Carry on to ban/block these "scum" sockpuppets of mine, but I would probably still be around. BUT this time using another account to make HELPFUL edits. Gravitational Megazord (talk) 05:59, 28 March 2008 (UTC)