User talk:Ezekiel53746/Archive 1

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	For giving yourself a barnstar. :D LikeLakers2 (talk) 21:36, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

"Vandalism" warning

Hi Ezekiel. There is a thread at the help desk, here, in which an action you took was mentioned. As noted there, I certainly agree with your revert at Robert MacNeil of controversial material about a living person without an inline citation (side note: leaving an edit summary when you revert is recommended). However, this was not vandalism at all, as you warned the IP editor against here. Vandalism is a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia. There is very strong policy that one should never warn users against "vandalism" for any edits that are not or might have been made in good faith.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:12, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Ezekiel53746. You have new messages at RoryReloaded's talk page.
Message added 23:12, 26 August 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Rory ^{Come for talkies} 23:12, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!

Miguel AG has eaten your cookies! The cookie made him happy and he'd like to give you a great big hug for donating them. Spread the WikiLove by giving out more cookies, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Thanks again!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:plate}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat the cookies with {{subst:munchplate}}!

Not cool!

Reverting vandalism and reporting it is fine, but creating User:92.20.139.59 was "grave dancing". Please refrain from it in the future. Favonian (talk) 21:18, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorry. It's my over-humorous personality. I won't do it again. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 21:21, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Ezekiel's Warning Templates AND Over-Humorous Personality Critics

annoying

You keep using those strange and informal warnings which may be confusing to new editors on User talk:92.20.139.59, but then, you did this, why did you do that? Puffin ^{Let's talk!} 21:36, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

It's my over-humorous personality. I can't help it! XD The translation is that I reported him to the WP:AIV. Oh, and those warning messages were created by me, because I have a friendly side, too. See my userpage to see how I use them. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 21:38, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Actually, you ought to try to help it, if you could. Warning templates, though impersonal, have been subjected to much scrutiny by the community; they were carefully worded to be both informative and professional; humourous warnings such as the ones you employ are rather inappropriate. That said, I see you're very young; can I point you to Wikipedia:Guidance for younger editors? Happy editing. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 22:19, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

They are friendly. I added extra parts to them, though they aren't originally in the warnings I use. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 22:24, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Okay, here are the warnings you saw.

---

Hello, my friend. I am here to notify you that you really have stop your disruptive editing. Please, because this is getting serious! If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, like you did at User:Paul Erik, you might definitely be blocked from editing. Please, I really don't wanna see you blocked. If you really wanna cause nonsense, use the sandbox for such silly stuff. That's where I go if I wanna do disruptive editing a little. Instead of vandalizing, help improve Wikipedia, because you are getting closer to getting blocked. Personal attacks aren't permitted... D: Please, stop. You aren't original anymore. Okay? Thank you, my friend. Ezekiel53746 (talk) 21:02, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello, my friend. Now, you REALLY need to stop your disruptive editing; the next time you vandalize Wikipedia , like you did at User: Paul Erik, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Stop. PLEASE!! This isn't funny anymore! I don't wanna see you get blocked! Losing your edit privileges is like, so bad you'll regret the nonsense edits you made. You really want to lose your editing privileges? Because you won't enjoy it. Use the sandbox for vandalism and such silly disruptive editing. I would use it if I were you, because I wouldn't enjoy getting blocked. Okay? Please. You could already be blocked like, this second. Improve instead of cause nonsense. You have just been reported to the WP:AIV. Okay? Please, stop, and perhaps I'll reconsider. Thank you, my friend. Ezekiel53746 (talk) 21:04, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

---

And HERE'S how they originally look like.

---

Hello, my friend. I am here to notify you that you really have stop your disruptive editing. Please, because this is getting serious! If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, like you did at Link Name Here, you might definitely be blocked from editing. Please, I really don't wanna see you blocked. If you really wanna cause nonsense, use the sandbox for such silly stuff. That's where I go if I wanna do disruptive editing a little. Instead of vandalizing, help improve Wikipedia, because you are getting closer to getting blocked. Thank you, my friend.

Hello, my friend. Now, you REALLY need to stop your disruptive editing; the next time you vandalize Wikipedia , like you did at Link Name Here, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Stop. PLEASE!! This isn't funny anymore! I don't wanna see you get blocked! Losing your edit privileges is like, so bad you'll regret the nonsense edits you made. You really want to lose your editing privileges? Because you won't enjoy it. Use the sandbox for vandalism and such silly disruptive editing. I would use it if I were you, because I wouldn't enjoy getting blocked. Okay? Please. You could already be blocked like, this second. Improve instead of cause nonsense. Thank you, my friend.

---

I may add extra parts to the warnings. And here is the only rule of using them; They may NOT be used by any vandals that received 3-4 warnings. Otherwise, they suffer the consequences! (Holds up duct tape) Okay? I AM 13, but I CAN ignore my over-humorous personality sometimes. Okay? Thank you, my friend. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 05:57, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

The point is not that these warnings are friendly; the point is that they're not sober — and some parts of them are downrighht offensive —. Wikipedia is a serious project, aimed at creating an encyclopaedia; it is indeed fun (otherwise very few of us would be here...), but we must remain professional, especially when dealing with people never met before. I still believe that your warnings are inappropriate, so I have to ask you to please refrain from using them in future. I'm sorry, but if you refuse, I'll have no other choise but to take them to WP:MFD. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 10:41, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm completely uninvolved but I saw this come up and I just had to comment. I really agree, they are inappropriate. The community as already stated doesn't like warning templates, so we had to word them very professionally. See, new users are generally kind of clueless and need help, so they may not understand your "humor" and take it very personally and make them even more mad and want to vandalize more. We have to remain professional and personal at the same time without being "obnoxious" to say. I'm sorry but you should stop using those templates, it's starting to become frowned upon.  JoeGazz  ♂  18:09, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

August 2011

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to introduce inappropriate pages to Wikipedia, as you did at User talk:209.181.27.246, you may be blocked from editing. If you need guidance on how to create appropriate pages, try using the Article Wizard. Your comments on the page were inappropriate and meet the definition of a personal attack it might be funny at the time, but you need to stop. -- DQ (t) (e) 17:36, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm so sorry! D: I guess my over-humorous personality IS starting to go too far... Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 20:18, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Images moved to Commons

I just wished to let you know that I have moved the Information pictures you uploaded to Commons. As per what the move to commons tag said, I have replaced it with the "NowCommons" tag, so that the enwiki page for may be deleted. The images will still be there after the enwiki pages are deleted, as the images are on Commons. Don't worry, it still credits you for the work. LikeLakers2 (talk) 18:27, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Oh, thank you. :) Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 20:07, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

This is your last warning; the next time you harm Wikipedia, as you did at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism with this edit, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   20:26, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Okay, okay! I'll just try to remain as serious as possible. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 20:27, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Non-free files in your user space

Hey there Ezekiel53746, thank you for your contributions! I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User:Ezekiel53746.

• See a log of files removed today here.
• Shut off the bot here.
• Report errors here.
• If you have any questions, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 05:06, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

I have once again removed the fair use image from your userpage. Maybe you did not understand what the bot did. An image is linked by placing a colon before its code, i.e., [[:File:Image name.jpg]] That's what the bot did. Without that colon the image itself displays and we cannot have that.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:33, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Warning template edits I made

I have made some edits to your warning templates. Don't worry, I kept the text the same. I simply added ~~<includeonly>~</includeonly>~<noinclude>~</noinclude> to each template, for convienence when warning. along with two (in the case of your your vandalism1 template, one) comments, so that they will be recognized as actual warning templates by ClueBot NG and Twinkle. Of course, I won't mind if you remove them, but just know that I did that for all 6 warning templates. Hope you don't get blocked! (Also, when DeltaQuad warned you above, I said to him on IRC that he should have used one of your warning templates instead of what he did use. Just figured I'd let you know.) LikeLakers2 (talk) 20:03, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

P.s. The noinclude tags are there to make the warning templates look better on the warning template page AND the preload view. LikeLakers2 (talk) 20:08, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Ezekiel53746 vandalism warnings

Ezekiel53746 vandalism warnings, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Ezekiel53746 vandalism warnings and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Ezekiel53746 vandalism warnings during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. either way (talk) 12:21, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

The template here is not clear since there is not a "Ezekiel53746 vandalism warnings" page...What I'm here to inform you is that I have nominated your 6 vandalism warning templates for deletion. You can contribute to the discussion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Ezekiel53746 vandalism warnings. I am nominating them because they are inappropriate and unprofessional as others have pointed out. Additionally, please let this be a final warning to you. If your "overly humorous" personality edits continue, you will be blocked. You have been warned for many of them such as this kind of edit. If they continue, you will be blocked. I highly suggest you step away from vandalism patrol and move into improving and editing articles. either way (talk) 12:26, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

But I HAVE improved articles! My original username is Ezekiel63745, and on there, I HAVE improved articles. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 20:09, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Great...but you haven't edited with that account since November. Additionally, you don't just stop improving articles because you did in the past therefore you never have to anymore. This is an encyclopedia project, not a "show off my overly humorous side" project. either way (talk) 20:14, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

But I lost the password to it! That's why. Also, I'm part of WikiPRoject templates. I feel that you are trying to get me rejected from it... D: Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 20:16, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

What does losing your password to the other account have to do with editing articles? You can still edit articles from this account. So what if you're a member of the WikiProject? Anyone can be a member of it. They just have to go there and sign their name. Please focus on improving this project and not your personal gains. either way (talk) 20:19, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Alright, take note in this. Not EVERYONE wants my warnings to be deleted. LikeLakers2 is my friend, and he's protesting. Can't we just leave them and move along? Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 20:20, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

And not EVERYONE wants your templates kept. It's a discussion. We'll see the outcome as the discussion develops. either way (talk) 20:22, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

I have already exported the templates with full history and templates included. So, if it needs a exported file during undeletion, I have one. LikeLakers2 (talk) 20:24, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

... D: I'm just feeling like I should go and break the rules by removing the delete templates, but I can't. I hope there are more speedy keeps... Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 20:28, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Editing others' comments

Do not edit others' comments as you did here. This violates policy. Edits such as this and some of your further disruption is making you dangerously close to a block, FYI. either way (talk) 20:34, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

I was just FIXING it! Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 20:35, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Doesn't matter. See WP:TPO. either way (talk) 20:36, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Oh, my, god...

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Courcelles 04:15, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

• Your edits in the last 46 hours have been highly disruptive. Unless and until you indicate a desire to contribute constructively, and not play games here, your editing privileges are suspended. Courcelles 04:17, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Sigh...It's times like these where I wish I could go back in time. I must admit, 2011 Wikipedia is kind of...oh, I shouldn't say it. 2010 Wikipedia is better, I must admit. What happened to it? No one nominated my templates for deletion back then. I want 63745 back. Why did I HAVE to forget the password for that?? Alright, I'll begin. I'll need one long week, though. And maybe I'll learn. After all, it WAS 9 months since I last edited, so I changed. Hopefully, I'll go back to my old 2010 self. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 04:26, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Six Days Since Block

Perhaps my mentor can be DeltaQuad. Message him/her on my talk page, Strage Passerby. I do have interest in CartoonNetwork, so...what shows shall I improve?? Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 20:52, 5 September 2011 (UTC) Oh, and I need another week to request an unblock. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 20:52, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

I have left a note for DeltaQuad on their talk page, per your request. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 13:30, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

If you didn't know, DeltaQuad does have an IRC channel on Freenode: ##DeltaQuad ^connect LikeLakers2 (talk | Sign my guestbook!) 15:03, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Seven Days Since Block

I'm starting to wonder if I'm not meant to be on Wikipedia, but the Commons instead. I'm into Nuvola images, so I should consider moving to the commons to make palette swap of some of those. Though, I'm sure there's always room for an Ezekiel to improve here as well, but I can't see it. I might try to be an anonymous IP address to practice. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 23:59, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Being an anonymous IP address on Wikipedia "to practice" would be block evasion, and would likely destroy your chance of ever getting unblocked. While blocked, you are not allowed to edit Wikipedia at all, whether as an IP (logged out), via another account, via a friend's account, or any other way. Editing on Commons instead is fine. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 00:01, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Oh. I don't wanna be a sock puppeteer! D: So, then...how will I know what I can try?? Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 01:55, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

ALRIGHT, THAT'S NOT FAIR! Someone named Ezekiel 7:19 has a humorous personality seen on his userpage, and he isn't blocked! This just doesn't seem fair. He can humorize his stuff but I can't? BOOO!!! DX Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 02:01, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Two Days Since Block

Okay, I'm trying to think what pages I can improve. I DO love LocoRoco. Also, I'm into Total Drama, Pokemon, and I can't live a day without my keyboard, though I'm not sure where I can improve anythingrelated to those. If you have any ideas for what you might like, lemme know. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 21:13, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

• I chanced upon your situation when following up on another disruptive user, who had commented at the MFD for your warning templates. Perhaps you might want to consider being mentored. You've been blocked only four days after you started editing, which is not a good sign, but with a mentor you may be able to turn things around. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 03:06, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Um... Who should I mentor? Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 05:08, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

No, you're not going to mentor anybody. I meant you might want to find someone to mentor you, help you out along the way. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 06:39, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Okay, then.... LIKELAKERS2! Notify him/her about this. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 00:01, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

LL2 is not competent to mentor you. A mentor is an experienced Wikipedian, well-versed in the sites guidelines and standards, who can teach you the correct behavior. I would suggest that you check Wikipedia:Adopt, look at the list of adopters there, and pick one of those. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 00:07, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

[....]IT FLUFFERNUTTER!!! Anyways, Fluffernutter is actually somewhat right. LikeLakers2 (talk) 00:08, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

• Since you say you're into Pokemon, have you considered asking one of their experienced editors to help you along and avoid you getting into trouble? Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 03:23, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Also, there is some IRC channels that Wikipedia has. LikeLakers2 (talk) 20:24, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Talk page access

I am very tempted to remove talk page access right now. Your post every couple of days on your block update/status is unnecessary. If this continues, I will take away talk page access. You have been blocked indefinitely, as you are well aware. Please move on. either way (talk) 02:21, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

But I'm trying to get help how to improve the wiki! You understand, right? Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 02:25, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

You are blocked. You cannot help the wiki. Only unblocked users can help the wiki. either way (talk) 02:33, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

I mean, I'm getting help to try to learn in hopes of being a good user. I CAN use {{unblock}}, ya know, but very few requests of that ARE accepted. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 04:27, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Okay, since DeltaQuad hasn't responded, and while I'm not sure exactly what I can accomplish, I'm going to offer to mentor you. If you accept, I will lay down a series of ground rules to follow, and if you agree to abide by them I will request an unblock for you. I'm starting to believe you may be headed down a path of no return – so you need to rein yourself in and decide for yourself whether you truly want to be unblocked and contribute positively, or just keep rambling on your talk page childishly as you are now. The choice is yours. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 05:59, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Wait... you? So you are on WP:ADOPT? Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 19:03, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

It does not matter whether he is on WP:ADOPT or not. He just offered to mentor you. Now you decide whether to accept or not. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 19:22, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Well...I guess it could work. We'll see. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 20:11, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

• Okay. Give me some time (12 hours?), I'll write something up. If you're happy to abide by the rules I set down, I'll be happy to help you. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 22:39, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Mentorship

I understand you are young, so I will do my best to phrase this simply. First, please read Wikipedia:Guidance for younger editors.

Proposed rules for mentorship:

General

1. You will enter into mentorship under me (or any person I may choose to fill in for me when I am unavailable) in lieu of your current indefinite block.
   • Meaning, I will be your mentor, or when I am not free to edit on Wikipedia, I may choose someone to help me while I am away. This will replace your block.
2. You will acknowledge your editing behaviour to date has been disruptive, and agree to change your ways under guidance from me (or any person who fills in for me).
   • Meaning you must be willing to understand and agree that you have been disruptive, and you will agree that as part of this mentorship, you will change.
3. You will need to understand what the community has told you at the MfD. Please take the time to read through all the comments again, including your own, and if you feel ready, tell me what you learned from the comments.

Behaviour

1. As part of the agreement, you will agree not to create further self-styled warning templates without prior consent from me or my alternate.
   • In other words, you need to ask my permission and let me see if it's a good idea first. If it is, I'll guide you along through the process. If it's not, you need to be ready to accept my judgement.
2. You will agree to stop misusing your talk page for simple chatter.
   • Your talk page is not for you to mumble on about your thoughts about your block. It's a place where other editors will come to discuss your past edits, or any other issue they think is important.
   • Likewise, other people's talk pages are not there for you to have a chat. It's okay to let of steam of have a discussion once in a while, but you should not only use it for that.
3. You will agree to stick to using the standard warning templates when fighting vandalism. When in doubt over whether an edit is vandalism, you should not revert and instead ask for guidance.

Goals

1. With help from me or my alternate, you will choose a goal to reach in terms of contributing to Wikipedia. This may be in the form of writing an article, or adding to an article we already have. I or my alternate will do our best to guide you along.
   • If you do decide you want to contribute a new article, please suggest it to me, and I will do my very best to help you get it to good article status at least.

Punishments

1. As part of this deal, you must understand and agree that if at any time I feel no progress is being made, I may request for you to be re-blocked. If that happens, your options will be limited, so try not to mess up.
2. In addition, even if I don't ask for it, any administrator who feels you need to be blocked will do so. If this happens, simply email me or my alternate (use the "Email this user" link) and we will look at what happened.

Note

• Please understand that there is a time difference between us, so I may not always be immediately available to you. The time difference is currently 14 hours, and will soon be 7 hours (I am moving to a different country next week). If you have any questions at any time I am not around, please ask any administrator for help.

Are these rules okay for you? Are there some you want to discuss, or are there any you want to add? You know yourself best, so if you think something on the list above will not help you (or if something not on the list will help you), please let me know.

Otherwise, if you have no issues with the above, I will seek to have your block overturned under these strict rules. Remember, one strike and you're out. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 09:07, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Hm... I GUESS it might work. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 20:41, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Ezekiel53746 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I'm so nervous, but I'll be fine with the help of Strange Passerby. I understand what I've been blocked for, and realize those warnings are for sore losers. Also, I won't nominate anything good for deletion again. I WILL improve WP, so I'm good.

Decline reason:

Looking at the edits you made while logged out on 9/1, I do not think it is a good idea to unblock you at this time. Swearing at other users and vandalizing is not acceptable. TNXMan 21:52, 8 September 2011 (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.

WAIT....WHAT?! SINCE WHEN?! I don't remember doing THAT! Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 22:20, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

• Ezekiel, I said I would request the unblock for you. If you are not willing to follow my instructions, we might as well not continue with this. I will approach Tnxman to ask about what he has said, but right now I trust him more than you. You need to show me and everyone else that you're willing to change, and the right way to start would be to admit this if you did anything. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 22:30, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
  • I know that. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 00:08, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
    • So, will you admit to having vandalised and made personal attacks by swearing at others on September 1? If it was you, please be honest with me. I do want to help you, but if you're not going to be frank then I won't waste my time. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 03:53, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
      • Alright, here it comes. I AM that IP. And it's all because of 92.20.139.59. I will tell you why. I was patrolling the IP, and then there was Paul Erik. The IP got mad for reverting his edits, so he put the message "Fück Off Paul you zealot cünt" twice on his userpage; One of a userbox, and another on a sectioned (Titled "My brag sheet"). It was so funny, I had to do this myself, vandalizing my own talk page. However, this make me go into a state of craze, and led me to anonymous trouble. Sorry to anyone else I wrote that to. You can see some edits of so on my userpage. Okay, now that that's out of the way, I will learn from my other mistakes. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 06:09, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
        • Okay. I am willing to give you one and only one chance. This will be on my record, so to speak, so please don't let me down. I will put the rules of our agreement on a subpage of yours, where we will organise any further activity relating to this mentorship. I will make it clear again that if you mess up even once, there is no going back. This includes logging out and editing as an IP. When you are unblocked, I would like you to not make any edits to any page except for your talk page, my talk page or our mentorship page for a while. Stay away from reverting vandalism and all that for a short time, maybe two weeks. We will start slowly and work our way up. Next week I will be moving almost 6700 miles to another country, so I will be away for a few days. During that time, User:Demiurge1000 has agreed to be my replacement. Please give him the same respect as I would expect, and follow our rules with him. I will personally make the unblock request for you, so you just need to sit tight and wait. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 06:29, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

• Ezekiel, I have now requested an unblock for you. Our mentorship page is at User:Ezekiel53746/Mentorship 2011. There I have put up the same rules as above, but I have added a point about sockpuppetry. Once you are unblocked, I would like you to do two things: (1) sign the agreement. (2) On the talk page, please describe to me what you have learned from reading the MfD against your "warning templates". Be as short or as long as you want. I will address your comments and try to guide you where I think you have made any mistakes. One final request once you are unblocked will be to behave yourself. If you have any questions, you are free to ask me at any time on my talk page or our mentorship talk page. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 06:51, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
  • Okay. I will do so. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 07:04, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Oh, and BTW, I'm going to get a bot to start archiving my talk page when it goes over 50000 bytes. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 07:17, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

That will be fine. Let me know if you need any help with that, of course. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 07:25, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

I handled it. It's set to archive my talk page whenever 12 days have been passed, and whenever my page hits 50,000 bytes. However, you can help if it doesn't work properly. Say... I have messages older then 12 days right now, and they aren't archived. I'll let you know if I discover I used it incorrectly. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 07:34, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

I had to change one thing, as you set it up to point your archives to the wrong place. Also, 50,000 bytes means that the bot will start a new archive when your archive hits 50,000 bytes. The size isn't related to this page. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 07:37, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Okay, here's what I want to happen. (cur | prev) 19:37, 8 September 2011 Strange Passerby (talk | contribs) (44,949 bytes) (fixing something) (undo)

I have 5000 bytes to go before I want my whole talk page archived to make room for a new one. I may do it manually, or automatically. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 07:40, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

My advice would be to not do it that way. See, if there are still active discussions taking place when your page hits 50,000 bytes, won't the sudden archiving be quite unhelpful to the people who are involved? I think the way it is set up now is fine. The next time Cluebot runs, you will see messages that are older than 12 days be archived away, and your talk page will drop in size from the current 45 kilobytes. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 07:54, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Your unblock

It's going to be difficult to argue for an unblock for you because of what you did when blocked, when you logged out to vandalise. The blocking admin and one other have already both declined my request. I will try my best to fight for you at the admin noticeboard, but be prepared to accept that you might not be unblocked. However, in that case, do not give up hope, as we will have other options to consider. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 02:32, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Okay. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 02:50, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Quick thing I noticed, Strange Passerby. (In Verdana to tell the letters differently)

I think the lowercase L and capital I shouldn't look so alike; Someone could create the account EzekieI53746, or EzekieI63745 and cause havoc on wikipedia. If this happens, make SURE it actually me. Ask check user to see if I'm really turning on a dark side by checking the IPs, cause I don't want to be framed.

Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 02:12, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Okay, StrangePasserby? I think I need to request an unblock myself. No one is listening to you, so I need to prove myself I will find a way to make good contributions. This is going BAD right now! Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 20:29, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

He already explained that might be the case. So I suggest that you now wait until he has time to explain the other options to consider that he already mentioned above. Displaying a lack of patience does not seem likely to improve your chances of getting unblocked anytime soon. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 20:39, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

I know that. I AM waiting, it's just that it seems like he isn't winning. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 21:19, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

And that's part of the problem. This isn't about winning and losing, it's about moving forward. I see nothing here which says why it is you want to become a productive editor, what you want to do with your time and efforts on this project. Until we see something about what you want to do, all we can see is what you have done, and that history is disturbing. The fact is, this discussion probably won't result in you "winning", but it will spell out what you can do in the mean time so that we can revisit it in the future. I know that you are young, and that things turning out not the way you want seems like a bad thing, but how you respond to failure - what you do when you end up on the losing side - sets the stage for the next contest. If you can look past your own feelings and start to learn from your experiences, people will recognize your efforts and your good will. So stop treating this particular review at WP:ANI as a death sentence, and start seeing it as an opportunity to learn how your actions effect others and are viewed by others. Your actions going forward will reveal your true character. VanIsaac_WS 09:31, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

I saw the discussion on ANI and took a look here. StrangePasserby and Ezekiel53746, how about trying something a bit unusual--a talk page only mentorship. That is, Ezekiel53476 would attempt to demonstrate to the community that they seriously want to improve the 'pedia by reading Wikipedia and proposing changes/improvements here, on this talk page. StrangePasserby would review those suggestions, and, if desirable, implement them xyrself (you can give credit via an edit summary). I recommend that if you do this, that you first work together to develop very specific projects (e.g., "Article X is badly in need of copy-editing. Show here how you would rewrite the lead" or "Find an article that is tagged as needing (more) sources. Find some sources for it, list them here, and explain how you would edit the text to include them"). This will, of course, be more work for both of you, but a few weeks or months of that might be a way to show the community, Ezekiel, that you really do want to contribute productively. However, if your main interest was in doing vandalism patrol, it probably won't work, because there's no way to do that efficiently via this indirect method. The alternative is simply to wait (usually 6 months, with 'no socking/IP editing is considered the minimum), then come back and clearly and carefully state why your previous behavior is wrong and what you would do if allowed back into the community (I'd recommend talking to someone by email first before making such a request). Qwyrxian (talk) 03:32, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Community unblock discussiond closed

Having reviewed the full discussion at ANI, but more importantly your own conversations here on this talkpage, I have closed the community unblock discussion. Editing Wikipedia as a whole requires a mature mindset, and a fair degree competence. This suggests that personal attacks of any kind are not permitted. Logging out - or editing anonymously while blocked in order to attack others is just not permissible for so many reasons - EVER! A significant part of the guide to appealing blocks focuses on understanding why you were blocked, and convicing the community that it will not recur. Although you say you understand, you have not proven that you understand. Even your "acceptance" of mentoring was an "I GUESS", as opposed to "I will".

Look, I personally have a philosophy that Everybody has something to add to Wikipedia: many just don't know it yet, and I beleive that you too have something to add. It's quite possible that you simply need to have a more mature approach to human interactions on the internet, and indeed a better understanding of the collegial nature of this project. When you signed up for this private website, you agreed to the rules; all of them.

I encourage you to gain some tutelage - this can be done while you're blocked. What you must not do is try and a) create a new userid, or b) edit anonymously. If you accept some tutoring here on your talkpage, it must stay right here, and you must be signed in.

You have two options: show that you understand, that you have learned, and that you will never repeat the behaviours that led to this block. Have this confirmed by your tutor. At that point, request an unblock accordingly. Your second option is to follow WP:OFFER, which will pretty much force you to do the same thing for at least 6 months, as well as show positive editing on another Wikimedia project. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 14:20, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

"Even your "acceptance" of mentoring was an "I GUESS", as opposed to "I will"." But I'm confused. I'm not a wizard that predicts the future, am I? Just lemme think about the situation I'm in. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 02:06, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Right, I'm back. I see I've missed quite a bit, I'm sorry about that, but I did have to move. Certainly, we can do what has been suggested above and have a talk-page mentorship scheme. But I'll only do that if you're willing to. Take as much time as you'll need to consider your options. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 09:17, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Unblock

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Ezekiel53746 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Looking back at my time as Ezekiel53746 (not as good as Ezekiel63745), I realized I WAS indeed being immature. What would you expect from an 11 (now 12) year old? I've decided that I wanna change and improve the wiki. I created the templates as 63745 in 2010, and went on vandalism patrol with them. Back then, it seemed like I was normal. I used them again as this account. Unfortunately, by deciding to go on vandalism patrol again, I'd come across some edits that, sad to say, would make me burst out laughing while reverting them. I had this monkey-see monkey-do personality back then, and went too far with my actions. If I can't be unblocked, I have no problem with that. I know I've been immature in the past, and a year and a half later, I realized that. I haven't heard from Strange Passerby lately after September 2011, and I'm not sure he remembers out mentorship. If I'm not unblocked, I CAN always contribute to another wikimedia product. So, again, I'd like to urge the community to give me another chance. I'm sorry for all of the stuff I did in the past, I really wanna contribute to Wikipedia again. If I decide to go on vandalism patrol again, I can laugh and revert, but I won't copy them and I'll use the standard warnings. The ones I made were on Ezekiel63745, I was only 10 years old back then. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 22:10, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Decline reason:

I'm usually in favour of second chances, but you should request unblock from your FIRST account, not the WP:SOCK account (✉→BWilkins←✎) 23:51, 13 March 2013 (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.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Ezekiel53746 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

In response to Bwilkins, I lost the password to Ezekiel63745. This explains why I made this one. If I didn't lose the password, chances are likely Ezekiel53746 wouldn't exist. Basically, I created this account to be my second Ezekiel63745 (it wasn't blocked during then) and switched the 5 and 6. Ezekiel63745 is currently blocked because it's my old account. However, Ezekiel63745 was blocked once because I tinkered with Baseball Bug's userpage. But when it was unblocked, I still had the password to the account. I didn't make this to evade blocks, I made it because I couldn't access Ezekiel63745. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 23:54, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Since you keep insisting on continuing to use your home-made warnings, I see no point in unblocking you. Max Semenik (talk) 06:42, 18 March 2013 (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.

"Since you keep insisting on continuing to use your home-made warnings, I see no point in unblocking you."
I'm sorry, what? I am not insisting. I was just asking. If an admin says no, I'm fine with that. I won't use them. The only reason I made improvements to the level 2 one when you called out some cons is because I wanted to see what it would look like. If I can't use them, that's fine. I will make constructive edits, based on my actual interests (For example, Pokémon and the 41 hours in an elevator incident?). I have no problem with remaining blocked but I just think I might be worth another chance. I am aware that you still do not want me to use creative warnings, so I won't. Also, I am aware making drama anonymously isn't cool. So I won't do anything un-constructive in the future. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 19:18, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

How come I'm not allowed to remove declined unblock requests?

As the unblock template says, "If you abuse this procedure by making too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page as long as you are blocked." Removing declined unblock requests might be seen as hiding relevant evidence. Huon (talk) 19:44, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Oh... I get it now. So 3 strikes and you are out? Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 19:45, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Not necessarily, but according to Qwyrxian's comment at the very bottom of this talk page, the admins are quickly losing patience. Your next unblock request should better address all the issues and convince them that the problems won't recur. Huon (talk) 21:27, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

I've addressed everything I've been blocked for and won't do them again.

• Only standard warnings.

• Contribute constructively to articles.

• No socks just for my entertainment (that's wrong).

If I wanna do something, I will make sure the community is okay with it by making a consesus vote. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 21:30, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

{{help}}

Also, am I allowed to type out my non-userpage template warnings that I create along the way on vandals? They will be more professional and each warning will be different. I will, of course, use the standard warnings more often. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 01:02, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

If you're unblocked, there's nothing that says you have to template anything, I sometimes just leave a "This is your final warning, stop now or you'll be blocked" kind of warning. :) gwickwire^talk_editing 01:22, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

This is a level 2 warning I could leave. It has my re-creation "Information green.svg" instead of just "Information.svg", A.K.A Information blue.

Hello, I'm Ezekiel. Please refrain from making unconstructive edits. I reverted your edit to (PAGE) because it wasn't constructive. You are free use the sandbox for any test edits. If you believe your edit was constructive and shouldn't have been reverted, please accept my humble apologies for mis-identifying your edit as vandalism. Thank you, Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 01:30, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that the only way for you to get unblocked is to agree to certain terms, one of them being to refrain from using custom warnings (and probably to stay away from countervandalism work for a while altogether). The warning above is very bad: it doesn't explain what unconstructive means, doesn't linkl to any policy or guidance for noobs, and has 3 instances of "constructive" in first 5 sentences. Max Semenik (talk) 14:46, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

I forgot to include all of that stuff in my previous warnings. Let's try this...

Hello, I'm Ezekiel. Please refrain from making unconstructive edits. I reverted your edit to (PAGE) because I identified it as vandalism and un-needed content. You are free use the sandbox for any test edits. If you believe your edit shouldn't have been reverted, please accept my humble apologies for mis-identifying your edit as vandalism. Thank you, Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 19:58, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Riiiight. And what will you forget next time? Max Semenik (talk) 06:42, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

... How I got blocked? Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 19:20, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Looking back into the archives on this, I believe you've just about used up any chance of being unblocked by a single admin. Unless you are willing to post an unblock request that actually addresses the problems that lead to your previous blocks (look through your archives, because socking was only part of it), as well as address the specific things that other users thought you would need to do, you are just wasting the community's time with new unblock requests. Should your next unblock request not be constructive, it will be time to remove your talk page access, after which your only recourse will be WP:BASC. Qwyrxian (talk) 13:48, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

I've addressed all of the problems for my block in reply to my previous one and won't do them again. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 19:20, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Unblock

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Ezekiel53746 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Looking back at my time as Ezekiel53746 (not as good as Ezekiel63745), I realized I WAS indeed being immature. What would you expect from an 11 (now 12) year old? I've decided that I wanna change and improve the wiki. I created the templates as 63745 in 2010, and went on vandalism patrol with them. Back then, it seemed like I was normal. I used them again as this account. Unfortunately, by deciding to go on vandalism patrol again, I'd come across some edits that, sad to say, would make me burst out laughing while reverting them. I had this monkey-see monkey-do personality back then, and went too far with my actions. If I can't be unblocked, I have no problem with that. I know I've been immature in the past, and a year and a half later, I realized that. I haven't heard from Strange Passerby lately after September 2011, and I'm not sure he remembers out mentorship. If I'm not unblocked, I CAN always contribute to another wikimedia product. So, again, I'd like to urge the community to give me another chance. I'm sorry for all of the stuff I did in the past, I really wanna contribute to Wikipedia again. If I decide to go on vandalism patrol again, I can laugh and revert, but I won't copy them and I'll use the standard warnings. The ones I made were on Ezekiel63745, I was only 10 years old back then. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 22:10, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Decline reason:

I'm usually in favour of second chances, but you should request unblock from your FIRST account, not the WP:SOCK account (✉→BWilkins←✎) 23:51, 13 March 2013 (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.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Ezekiel53746 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

In response to Bwilkins, I lost the password to Ezekiel63745. This explains why I made this one. If I didn't lose the password, chances are likely Ezekiel53746 wouldn't exist. Basically, I created this account to be my second Ezekiel63745 (it wasn't blocked during then) and switched the 5 and 6. Ezekiel63745 is currently blocked because it's my old account. However, Ezekiel63745 was blocked once because I tinkered with Baseball Bug's userpage. But when it was unblocked, I still had the password to the account. I didn't make this to evade blocks, I made it because I couldn't access Ezekiel63745. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 23:54, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Since you keep insisting on continuing to use your home-made warnings, I see no point in unblocking you. Max Semenik (talk) 06:42, 18 March 2013 (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.

Please see [1]. I need to know why I can improve wikia wikis but not Wikipedia. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 04:51, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

You are not permitted to edit Wikipedia due to persistent distruptive editing. See your talkpage archive for details. Yunshui 雲‍水 09:26, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

That was two and a half years ago. I understand why I got blocked. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 19:16, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello Ezekiel53746. I have restored prior block notices and declined unblock requests; these should not be removed. I think the contents of these prior declined requests for unblock answers your admin-help request as well. Please feel free to post another unblock request of you like, and an admin who specialises in that work will review it. -- Dianna (talk) 03:42, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

That was the archive bot who did it. :/ My block is no longer necessary, I understand what I did and I'll do better in the future. I will not make those warnings again (5a... Really?) and I'll improve the encyclopedia based off of my interests. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 05:19, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

No less than 2 weeks ago you proposed a new version of your customized warnings. That makes it pretty hard to believe you. Qwyrxian (talk) 09:34, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

That was because it was a year and a half since I used this account, and I thought things changed. I guess not. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 18:55, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Unblock

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Ezekiel53746 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Looking back at my time as Ezekiel53746 (not as good as Ezekiel63745), I realized I WAS indeed being immature. What would you expect from an 11 (now 12) year old? I've decided that I wanna change and improve the wiki. I created the templates as 63745 in 2010, and went on vandalism patrol with them. Back then, it seemed like I was normal. I used them again as this account. Unfortunately, by deciding to go on vandalism patrol again, I'd come across some edits that, sad to say, would make me burst out laughing while reverting them. I had this monkey-see monkey-do personality back then, and went too far with my actions. If I can't be unblocked, I have no problem with that. I know I've been immature in the past, and a year and a half later, I realized that. I haven't heard from Strange Passerby lately after September 2011, and I'm not sure he remembers out mentorship. If I'm not unblocked, I CAN always contribute to another wikimedia product. So, again, I'd like to urge the community to give me another chance. I'm sorry for all of the stuff I did in the past, I really wanna contribute to Wikipedia again. If I decide to go on vandalism patrol again, I can laugh and revert, but I won't copy them and I'll use the standard warnings. The ones I made were on Ezekiel63745, I was only 10 years old back then. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 22:10, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Decline reason:

I'm usually in favour of second chances, but you should request unblock from your FIRST account, not the WP:SOCK account (✉→BWilkins←✎) 23:51, 13 March 2013 (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.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Ezekiel53746 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

In response to Bwilkins, I lost the password to Ezekiel63745. This explains why I made this one. If I didn't lose the password, chances are likely Ezekiel53746 wouldn't exist. Basically, I created this account to be my second Ezekiel63745 (it wasn't blocked during then) and switched the 5 and 6. Ezekiel63745 is currently blocked because it's my old account. However, Ezekiel63745 was blocked once because I tinkered with Baseball Bug's userpage. But when it was unblocked, I still had the password to the account. I didn't make this to evade blocks, I made it because I couldn't access Ezekiel63745. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 23:54, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Since you keep insisting on continuing to use your home-made warnings, I see no point in unblocking you. Max Semenik (talk) 06:42, 18 March 2013 (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.

Please see [2]. I need to know why I can improve wikia wikis but not Wikipedia. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 04:51, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

You are not permitted to edit Wikipedia due to persistent distruptive editing. See your talkpage archive for details. Yunshui 雲‍水 09:26, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

That was two and a half years ago. I understand why I got blocked. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 19:16, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello Ezekiel53746. I have restored prior block notices and declined unblock requests; these should not be removed. I think the contents of these prior declined requests for unblock answers your admin-help request as well. Please feel free to post another unblock request of you like, and an admin who specialises in that work will review it. -- Dianna (talk) 03:42, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

That was the archive bot who did it. :/ My block is no longer necessary, I understand what I did and I'll do better in the future. I will not make those warnings again (5a... Really?) and I'll improve the encyclopedia based off of my interests. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 05:19, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

ClueBot did it again. .__.; Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 21:44, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

No less than 2 weeks ago you proposed a new version of your customized warnings. That makes it pretty hard to believe you. Qwyrxian (talk) 09:34, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

That was because it was a year and a half since I used this account, and I thought things changed. I guess not. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 18:55, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

If you would like an admin to review your block, then please post an unblock appeal (here's how), rather than repeatedly using the {{adminhelp}} template. Your statement above does not require the attention of an admin; it isn't even a question or request. Yunshui 雲‍水 15:01, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

I need to use my unblock template wisely, since if I don't get it right, my talk page access is revoked. I sent an appeal to WP:BASC before trying my last unblock template. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 05:22, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Ezekiel53746 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

My last chance... I started as a new user in 2010 October, as Ezekiel63745. I was in pretty ogod standing, making many good edits. People liked my warnings. I only got blocked once for 24 hours for tinkering with a userpage. Then, I took a hiatus from Wikipedia and looked at stuff that influenced me. This came to Wikipedia, and I caused issues, including harrassing other users and making crude BDSM jokes. Also, my warnings weren't as good as they were in 2010, so Courcelles blocked me. I was never unblocked. Strange Passerby offered his mentorship, and I'm hoping that he'll comply after one and a half years. I tried again on the simple english wikipedia, no good. I'm hoping that my immaturity can be put in the past. I WAS 11 during this account after all, now 12. I know my warnings are not welcome, even after a year, so they will be stuffed in the trash, especially 5a, one I won't miss. I know why I got blocked, I was being immature because of those influences I looked at (or watched) while away, especially vandalizing anonymously for drama that "I" am involved in, so I will never do them again. I want to help Wikipedia grow, starting with my interest and stuff I know about. I'll make it with a mentor, and I want to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. I want a careful review of this, and I'm hoping I will shine in glory again. I have tons of ideas to articles, and don't forget fixing them.

Decline reason:

Unblock declined by ArbCom; procedural decline of template to remove user from Category:Requests for unblock. Yunshui 雲‍水 09:17, 3 April 2013 (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.

|}

ArbCom unblock appeal

The Arbitration Committee has carefully considered the user's appeal and has declined to unblock at this time.

For the Arbitration Committee. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 08:56, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Okay, I understand, I still can't edit. Maybe I'll be lucky when I'm more mature. I AM only 12, you know. I'll come back in a month or two. Ezekiel! ^{Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.} 19:22, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Good images

	Good images
	Thanks for your good images (I don't know why I'm sending this hence youer blocked indefenetly) ColdCreeper44 (talk) 05:52, 30 May 2018 (UTC)