User talk:Jacknstock

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Banned

This account has been indefinitely blocked, as it was created for the sole purpose of vandalism. Fawcett5 12:50, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

Actually, I was intent on gaining due recognition for my role in the creation of Encyclopædia Dramatica. I haven't vandalized anything. --Jacknstock 00:35, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
Hello! Hello, admins! Please unblock me! I did not receive any warning, notification or opportunity to discuss Fawcett5's concern prior to my banning and I am not a vandal. Fawcett5 does not allow users to e-mail him and I cannot post on Fawcett5's user talk page or any admin page to discuss this! --Jacknstock 01:37, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Still banned

I haven't heard anything about why I was banned, how long I will be banned or whether there has been any review progress. --Jacknstock 06:14, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jack sings

When I was young
 I never needed anyone
 And makin’ love was just for fun
 Those days are gone

Livin’ alone
 I think of all the friends I’ve known
 But when I dial the telephone
 Nobody’s home

All by myself
 Don’t wanna be
 All by myself anymore
 All by myself
 Don’t wanna live
 All by myself anymore

Hard to be sure
 Some times I feel so insecure
 And love so distant and obscure
 Remains the cure

All by myself
 Don’t wanna be
 All by myself anymore
 All by myself
 Don’t wanna live
 All by myself anymore

[edit] Edivorce's comments

It has occured to me that I could be criticized for removing a comment by Edivorce from my talk page. I removed it because it was in response to some text I posted here that I have also removed. The text contained ideas I had in October last year for changes to an article. The ideas are now outdated - the article has moved on and so have I. I don't want to give the impression that I still intend to edit the article, and it isn't entirely appropriate to have the text of an entire article on a user talk page.

With the article text removed, Edivorce's comments would seem misplaced, although they weren't at the time Edivorce wrote them.

If anyone wants to see the article ideas and Edivorce's response, they can view them in the history of this talk page. --Jacknstock 05:23, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Aacknstock

I've noticed a couple of times that someone has incompletely worked their way through Category:Requests_for_unblock, starting at the beginning of the list. Both times, the person stopped just short of reaching me. If I'd known about this, I would have registered as Aacknstock. That isn't my name, though. I guess I can add this to my list of things to blame on my parents. --Jacknstock 04:58, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unblocking

Hrm, yours is an interesting case. I'll forward it to the admin noticeboard. NSLE (T+C) at 07:08 UTC (2006-05-26)

PS I've removed the template, the exact text in it was "1) I believe I have been banned for sufficient time. 2) My edits were not intended as vandalism. 3) I did not receive any warning, notification or opportunity to discuss Fawcett5's concern prior to my banning.". NSLE (T+C) at 07:09 UTC (2006-05-26)
On second thought... I see that Fawcett5 is still active nowadays on Wikipedia. I'll remind him of this case, and ask him to do the posting to the admin noticeboard instead. NSLE (T+C) at 07:14 UTC (2006-05-26)
Thanks. Is it protocol for the admin who did the banning to post to the admin noticeboard? Why can't another admin do that? --Jacknstock 11:52, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WP:ANI

The original post of my case seems to have been somewhere between Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive44 and Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive45. It looks like an archive was misplaced somehow by David Gerard. However, I was able to find the last revision mentioning me. It doesn't look like there was any discussion whatsoever. I also looked in Wikipedia:Account_suspensions, but there was no mention of me. The policy on WP:VAN was not followed as there was no warning template added to my talk page. Given the opportunity, I would have argued that my edits were an attempt to provide additional or alternative information, and thus were not vandalism. I certainly wouldn't have persisted with similar edits against the objections of other contributors (even without the possibility of being banned) because it's simply not that important to me. --Jacknstock 04:46, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

I'll (re)post your case to ANI, as I haven't yet received a reply from Fawcett. NSLE (T+C) at 06:38 UTC (2006-05-27)
Posted to ANI. Now it's a wait. NSLE (T+C) at 06:46 UTC (2006-05-27)

I've unblocked you. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 06:54, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Good luck in editing wikipedia, and sorry any action by us all seems to have taken so long. Ian13/talk 08:58, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive103#An_indef-block_case_from_September_2005
--Jacknstock 03:11, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome!

Hello Jacknstock, and welcome to Wikipedia! Here are some recommended guidelines to help you get involved. Please feel free to contact me if you need help with anything. Best of luck and happy editing! --Ian13/talk 09:00, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
Getting started
Getting your info out there
Getting more Wikipedia rules
Getting help
Getting along
Getting technical


[edit] Touché?

In light of this comment, are you going to change your vote on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Word (bookstore)? You could do that by editing it as

<s> Keep</s> '''Delete'''

which produces Keep Delete with an indication you had changed your mind. It is up to you, but that is what I thought your comment might mean. Regards--A Y Arktos\talk 09:26, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

It's not a vote, it's a discussion. On the one hand, I can see the point that the article is not of much use to anyone. On the other hand, I don't see any strong reason why it should be deleted. --Jacknstock 12:22, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
  • No problem, appreciate it is a discussion but not sure how otherwise to refer to suport and delete comments, which are indeed tallied. My raising the matter here was only because you had said You have made a very good case for deletion. ... Nonetheless, there's very little of interest to say about this company, so little value in developing an encyclopedia article. - didn't seem as though you were interested in continuing to support retention.--A Y Arktos\talk 12:32, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Geelong mayors

Excellent work and some quick research there. I'm living in Geelong for the next few weeks so I'll be able to make the GHS next open day, Tuesday. Thanks again, your work brought the article a long long way. -- Longhair 06:11, 5 July 2006 (UTC)