User talk:Sigmadium

This is a Talk Page. (naw, really? :P)

False Claim of Sockpuppetry[edit]

It's obvious you're Rikara and you're still stuck on making the same edits. Your block is still active, so expect this account to be blocked as a sock soon. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 03:10, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't even know who he/she is. This is my first Wikipedia account... -Sigmadium (talk) 03:11, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't bother lying. You made it obvious the second you started restoring your edits. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 03:12, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't restore anyone else's edits but my own. I am not lying. I am not him/her. -Sigmadium (talk) 03:13, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you are. You can change your name, but not your habits. You do the same dash-signing thing, restored the same edit on your first edit, and show up on the exact same pages. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 03:15, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Being an editor on the Code Lyoko pages means nothing. I did not restore any one else's edits but my own. I am offended that I just came to WIkipedia and already some rude user is Reverting perfectly good edits and accusing me of things I have not done. I did a little research, and Rikara didn't seem to edit any Code Lyoko pages, save for Garage Kids. -Sigmadium (talk) 03:17, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It means something when you're doing the same actions. It's obvious with your use of the in use template and basically everything else, and I'm pretty much tired of this. At the very least, you've stopped cursing up a storm, which is good, but you're still acting the same where reverts are concerned. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 03:21, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So, because I use a known WIkipedia template, i'm automatically him/her? No. I am not that user, nor do i know him/her. I am not appreciating that I just came here and i'm being treated like dirt. -Sigmadium (talk) 03:23, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Like I said, it's not that you're doing one thing, you're doing all of them, all at once. No editor shows up and repeats the same things that got another blocked. You know you're the same user, and you should have just waited the nine days until your block wore off. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 03:30, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, I am not. Listen to me clearly before I get a staff member here. I AM NOT THAT USER. -Sigmadium (talk) 03:34, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All you've done is learn to be more civil, but the rest of your behavior is the same. You're still doing the same content deletion and other such nonsense, and since I've already reported you, I'll take my leave. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 03:37, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are false reporting. Get over it. You are wrong- I am not that user. -Sigmadium (talk) 03:40, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Block[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for sockpuppetry. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

Gwernol 16:43, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

No. I am NOT "Rikara" nor do I know him/her. Your "proof" is either coincidential or wrong.

Decline reason:

Nope, fairly straightforward sockpuppet account. — Yamla (talk) 01:12, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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.

No, It is not. I see no actual evidence. I am not that user. I do not appreciate that I just came to Wikipedia, and already I am being harassed and accused of "sockpuppetry". I came here to help WIkipedia's articles. Also, A page I created, Code Lyoko: Virtualize was for no reason moved to Code Lyoko: Quest for Infinity, a Nintendo Wii game.

Trust not the Penguin also claims I was reverting "Rikara"'s edits on Code Lyoko, and I was not. I was making my own edits. This is a false claim of "sockpuppetry". -Sigmadium (talk) 01:17, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Rikara — You can't lie to checkuser. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 03:15, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And what exactly IS "checkuser"? -Sigmadium (talk) 04:10, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CHECKUSER: In short, you're using the same computer and people can tell. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 04:26, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. Well, regardless, I AM NOT THAT GODDAMN USER. Get over yourself. -Sigmadium (talk) 04:19, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed abusive sockpuppet account, Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Rikara. --Yamla (talk) 13:37, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]