Request for unblock for User:Benniguy[change source]
(Please do not delete this, as it is an official request for unblock. If you could take it to the AN, I would be very grateful :] )
Hello. I would like to request an unblock please. I am now taking medication for my Body Dysmorphic Disorder. I was not on medication before, and that was the reason for my bizarre mood swings. I am glad to say that these have stopped now that I have started with my medication. I appologize greatly for what happened before, and if I could go back and undo it, I would. However, obviously, I cannot go back, and the only way is forward, and I hope that you will allow me to progress forward by bettering myself as a wikipedia editor here.
I would like to say sorry especially to these people:
- Tygrrr, you were possibly the most patient person with me. You sorted out my talk page after I completely ruined it, you tried to help me become a better editor, but all I ever did was treat you with a sheer lack of respect. I hope that you can understand that I did not mean to be so immature to you, like the whole "List of Not-Wikifriends" incident, which I keep reminding myself about and genuinely do feel so sorry about it. It was a mean thing to do, and I know that if someone did that to me, I would feel very upset. I hope you can forgive me.
- Gwib. Well, its pretty self-explanatory here, lol. I was a right little idiot in my behaviour towards you. I tried to purposefully wind you up. I even removed my support for your adminship after it had been accepted just to annoy you. You are genuinely a nice person, and I was the one in the wrong. Hopefully you won't hold it against me now that I'm on my medication.
- Razorflame. You tried especially hard to help me. You even offered to half-adopt me. I didn't show any gratitude, and I snapped at you terribly at one time. I am sorry.
- IuseRosary. I lead you astray and at times helped stop you reaching your full potential as an editor. As I have already said to you in real life, I would take it all back if I could, and I am sincerely so sorry that I did it.
- ChristianMan16, I acted most weirdly to you, just for the attention, and I hope you won't hold it against me, as you are doing very well as a new editor here, and I wish I got off to the same start as you did. I can identify with you, as it seems we've both had more than our share of blocks and bans ;) So I want to follow your example and learn from my past mistakes to improve my editing.
- Barliner and Archer7, I used your real names during one discussion just for attention to be selfish. This was a completely stupid and immature thing to do, and I know I should have respected you enough not to do this.
- Huji, you were among those warning me during my "colouring in the discussion page" incident. You warned me not to continue, and I still did, through my stubbornness. I see that you too, are interested in linguistics. If I am allowed back, hopefully I will be able to work along-side you with it?
- and last but not least, Jeffpw, for having let you down. I hope that if i can edit here, I can prove to you that I am not so helpless as you probably think I am. You are my role-model jeff, and it makes me really sad that I never managed to live up to your expectations.
Well... it seems like I have something to apologize to everyone for ;) But seriously, I honestly am sorry for all of it.
I hope that now that I am on medication and can conduct myself more appropriately, that you will consider my return. I will follow every single rule that you give me, without complain. Perhaps you could consider giving me a week's trial or something? And then gathering on how well I did, allow me to continue? I promise I will concentrate more on edits than on talking this time, something which I know I did not do very well at last time. So anyway, like I said, now that I'm on the medication, hopefully you will give me a second chance.
- Hi, thanks for replying. Well, I'm on serious medication for my disorder this time. It stops me from having mood swings and acting irrationally. I think now that I am receiving treatment, I should be able to edit better, if you'll let me Inkpen2 (talk) 18:06, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Medication or not, I don't think you'll ever be a good editor here. People forget to take it, they become immune to it and then there are potential side effects. You'll also be going through adolescence, the greatest mood swinger of them all, and there are no medications to counter those side effects. You've been given countless chances and said sorry after each event, you've made the word empty and meaningless, you've created sockpuppets and intentionally irritated people. I'm rejecting your request with no regrets. Let's see what others say. --Gwib -(talk)- 18:19, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
- Well, surely the adolescence idea would apply to you too though? Anyway, the only potential side-affect to my medication is suicide, so hey, if that happens, it won't be a problem to you here if i've started editing anyway ;) Please just give me a go... if only for a week, so you can see the extent i have changed. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised... I am now able to go to school every day (before, I wasn't, as I felt too scared to leave the house on some days)... thats just one of the clear signs of the improvements that I've made since being on the medication. I hope that you'll reconsider, as there is no chance of me "forgetting to take it" as you say, as I have regular check-ups and things. Please don't hold my disorder against me. I've aready suffered enough from it in the past. Inkpen2 (talk) 18:27, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
- Hi, yeah I know, I made a complete mess of things last time, but that was mainly due to my disorder. Now that I'm receiving treatment for it, I hope you'll consider giving me a week's trial to see if I can be trusted. If after that time, you think I can't, then block me and never open a request from me again. But I know that I can do better this time now that I'm over (well... being treated for) my disorder. Thank you for replying though. Inkpen2 (talk) 18:31, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
As I mentioned before, this has been said over and over and over and over and over again. I'm against unblocking you within a year from when you were blocked. Medication is unpredictable, and I get violent mood swings, especially since I'm good friends with the girl I fancy and don't want to tell her, but whenever I do I don't go and disrupt Simple. Don't try to blame your troublesome attitude on your disorder. Your inability to handle it was why you got blocked and medicine won't cure you of either. --Gwib -(talk)- 19:02, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
- Erm... Well, This was unexpected. I am going to try and be as unbiased as i can, because we all knoiw that i am friends in real life with ben. I have seen a change in ben scince he has been on his medication. He has shown more confidence as well as more grown up and he acts quite adult now. I beleieve that his average grades at school have risen significantly scince he began taking the medicine. He seems quite focused and hard-working now. I think that his proposal for a one/two week trial seems fair, although that may just be me being biased, and unlike the rest of you, I never really had to put up with him and clear up after his mess each time.
- I did fall out with ben in real life for a while, mainly due to this Wikipedia thing, and I think that it is safe to say now that I have seen a significant change in him scince he began taking his medication shortly after the whole Iamandrewrice sarga finished. It would certainly be quite hard to fall out with him now, he practically has a new personality. it's quite bizare.
- I don't think that the sockpuppets can be excused, they were completely wrong and ben should have just not done it. This is my opinion, I hope you will consider it, as I am quite close to ben in "real Life" - but I understand that alot of you will probably not trust me on this issue, but I have tried to be as unbiased as possible now that i am a serius editor and if ben did come back and cause havoc, i would be the one helping to put it right again. Thank-You Chicken-The-Turkey-Farm-Face-In-Your-Face-Munching-on-your-lips-hips-chips-Ps.IuseRosary? (talk) 19:01, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Thank you IuseRosary, and yes I think you have managed to remain unbiased very well, as I see that you have become a great editor here. Er, Gwib, that was kind of mean. You're holding it against me that I have a serious life-threatening disorder? I have tried to deal with my disorder as best as i can, and have suffered for countless years with it, but I was hoping that now I had started the medication, that things would all improve. I am sorry about this friend of yours Gwib, but please don't take that out on me. I have said sorry, and I mean it. Hopefully you will at least notice a change in tone in my writing since last time? If you just give me a go for a week, then what harm can it do? Please write back. Inkpen2 (talk) 19:08, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
- Ben, I am not sticking up for you, I am just voicing my opinion as a wikipedia editor here, rather than your friend. Oh, and also. I say that maybe it is a fair requst of Ben's to let him come back for a trial and then see where we go from there because Ben would know that if he did anything, anything at all. he argued, vandilised, mucked about in anyway, he would be blocked and banned forever. That way, he is less likely to do anything and just edit. I really think that he maybe wants to come back and help properly this time, rather than cause trouble and risk getting banned. But yeah, once again - This is just my opinion and you can use it as you wish because a ot of you will probably not trust me on this issue with good reason. Chicken-The-Turkey-Farm-Face-In-Your-Face-Munching-on-your-lips-hips-chips-Ps.IuseRosary? (talk) 19:12, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Ok thanks IuseRosary, i appreciate your oppinion. Also Gwib, you seem to think that your friend issue is somewhere on the scale of BDD. Do you realise quite how disabling the effects of BDD are? Its suicide rates are the highest out of all mental disorders. It is very serious indeed, yet you seem to think its effects are comparable to you fancying someone who doesnt know? Do you realise just how unthoughtful that is? Inkpen2 (talk) 19:15, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
- Yup, I'm comparing them on two identical plains. They both induce mood swings and both mess with your head. BDD comes with different effects, some severe, some easily comparable to the classic adolescent problems. BDD even develops in adolescence, making the two basically identical. You are still young and probably only in the early stages of adolescence, therefore both my problems and yours are as serious as one another. --Gwib -(talk)- 19:22, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Are you being serious? You honestly believe that my disorder which used to make me too scared to leave the house, and has left me attempting suicide 5 times already, is the same as you fancying a girl but being too scared to ask out? Are you actually for real or is this some kind of sick joke? Inkpen2 (talk) 19:26, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
- If you think adolescence is a joke, maybe you should be on some more powerful medication. --Gwib -(talk)- 19:30, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Oh my god you're actually not joking :o Have you ever tried killing yourself? Have you ever conducted plastic surgery on yourself? Have you ever had a mental break-down? And you think adolescence is bad compared to all of that? Why do you hate me so much? I just wanted a second chance in life after I have gone through over 6 years of this. Why is it that hard for you to even consider letting me try again and start afresh? Inkpen2 (talk) 19:34, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
- Ben is 17. If that answers your question about what stage nof adolesence he is in. He had his birthday about 3 weeks ago. His party was megafun. Chicken-The-Turkey-Farm-Face-In-Your-Face-Munching-on-your-lips-hips-chips-Ps.IuseRosary? (talk) 19:25, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Look Gwib, i can't do any more than appologize. If you were in my position and had BDD, I know you'd feel differently, but obviously (and thankfully for you) you're not. I want to just at least see how a trial of a week could go. I also feel like I owe it to everyone here, especially Jeff, to make up for what I have done. Ok can anyone other than Gwib give their view, as Gwib just seems to be taking this, and my disorder as a joke, apparently finding it "hilarious". I honestly want to make a go of things here, and people laughing at me because I felt depressed about my body image is not helping me to be honest. Inkpen2 (talk) 20:29, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
- I've said it before, I'll repeat and repeat it again and again like poor Tygrrr had to when she was explaining what pages you could and couldn't edit.
- You've said sorry over and over. Apparently those two words mean about as much to you as actually helping this Wikipedia. I'm against unblocking you as you alone probably decreased the number of edits here tenfold through pure annoyance, being in general pathetic and pretending not to understand why "we're all being so mean to you".
- You're clever, you write quite well and if your IQ is as high as you claim it to be on your userpage, you'll accept that your disruption here will not be "erased" by saying sorry. You will not get a "weeks trial" and probably will never get unblocked at all. --Gwib -(talk)- 20:27, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
If I'm clever, then why not let me edit? I would surely be of use. And you don't seem to listen to me do you? Now that I have started taking medication, I am a very different person, and going on what you know about me last time is not the thing to do at all. I am completely different. i don't even understand how I could have changed so much, as in fact in some ways there are some things i wish had not changed, such as the fact that I am less emotional now, but I guess that is also a good thing depending on how you see it. Please just at least give me a chance ok? And by the way, that really hurts about how you find it funny about my disorder. Thats just going too far. Inkpen2 (talk) 20:34, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
- I have reviewed your unblock request and have decided not to unblock you at this time. Feel free to come back in a couple of months and request again, thank you. Oysterguitarist 20:52, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Ok thank you for reviewing it fairly. Does anyone else have an oppinion? If not, I will come back in up to a month, as Oysterguitarist suggested, and retry. Please do not protect this page however, as this is the only way in which I am able to request an unblock. With regards to what Gwib was mentioning. Although I may have made mistakes before, and appologized for many things... the things which I appologized for, I think you will find, that I never repeated exactly the same mistake again. Surely this must show at least that I have been learning from my mistakes? I am sad that you do not think I could ever be a good editor Gwib, as I am trying really hard, and I hope that, with help from people like you on here, that I will be able to prove that I can contribute. You say that I do not seem to really be sorry or have good intentions for wikipedia. That isn't true Gwib. I want to try so so hard to get things right this time. I miss everyone here... even you belive it or not, and I feel that since I have gone, that an important part of my life has also gone. I really enjoy helping the community, and although I may have made mistakes last time, its not like everything that I did was so bad. For instance, I made all these pages:
- Fashion SimpleWikiProject
- Giorgio Armani
- Hair iron
- Hair straightening
- Jemella Group
- LG Prada
- Motorola RAZR V3
- LGBT SimpleWikiProject
- Maltese people
- Electric Gardens
- Body dysmorphic disorder
- Highly sensitive person
- (Robot - I did not make this one, but I put a lot of time and reference information into it)
I think hopefully that will show that I did have good intentions here. If you look at the BDD page in particular, I spent hours on it, literally... and was even hoping to put it up for GA status eventually. I really plead again to reconsider, as I know I can benefit this site so much. If you just try me for 3 days, as a trial, and if I do a single thing wrong, then ban me. At the moment, I'm just indefinitely blocked, but if I was banned, that would be a whole lot worse for me, so surely this must show how serious and determined I am about this? Please just give me a chance now that I am taking medication for my disorder. If I even have one mood-swing, then have me blocked and banned immediately, ok? Just please at least give me one chance to try things again :) With regards to me in fact wasting other editor's time before... surely it is also time-wasting to have to keep worrying whether I am sockpuppeting or not? (Even though I am not). Every time I come here, I see another checkuser being done for me... I think that is certainly time consuming. Whereas if I was here, then you would not need to worry about whether I was sockpuppeting anyway, and waste so much checkuser resources. I am not saying that this is a good reason, but I am saying that it would probably be more time-consuming for you, if I was not here anyway, because if I was here, all you would have to do would be block me in an instant if I do anything wrong, but if I am not here, you always seem to worry that I am abusing multiple accounts... So please everyone, give me a trial. That is all I am asking for. My disorder is basically cured now. (Oh and in response to Gwib telling me that I might "forget to take my medication", the medication is not a "pill"... it is a series of psychotherapy sessions, and anti-depressant injections that the doctors give me.) I am not asking for a full guarantee that I will be allowed back forever... just a few days (or even a day) for a trial, just to show how different I am, so you can consider allowing me back after the trial ends. This way, you have nothing to lose. Either I behave well and you can keep me as a constructive editor... or I behave badly and you block and ban me the second I say something wrong. That way, you win whatever happens. So how about it? Do you accept my honest appology? Inkpen2 (talk) 16:56, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
- I don't see how allowing him to try once again could really hurt anything. At the worst, you could always block him again if there was any disruption. He does seem sincere, and if he is taking medication now, it seems both petty and rather cruel to continue to punish somebody who has had a medical condition and is now being treated. Blocks are supposed to be preventative, not putative. Jeffpw (talk) 16:55, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you. If you let me back, I promise to do every single thing that you tell me. Inkpen2 (talk) 17:07, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you too. What length of trial length would I have? Inkpen2 (talk) 18:03, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
I am not in favour of unblocking today, but will be happy to do so when I hear how benniguy feels in a couple of weeks (not months)
- Gwib’s comparison was not only pointless, as he and Benniguy are about the same age, but insulting to a lot of people. The mood swings of any stage of puberty are nothing compared to the swings that will see a person not want to get out of bed through fear. They are nothing compared to the swings that will drive a person to think about or attempt suicide. Nothing compared to the swings that will drive teenagers to cut themselves because the endorphin rush caused by the pain is the only thing which actually gives any sort of pleasure.
- Let me see how benniguy feels in two weeks. If the medication/psycotherapy is genuine, then I can consider voting to allow him to return, but it would be for a trial basis of two or three weeks. --Bärliner 18:42, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Ok, thank you for understanding. I promise I am basically better now. I will come back in two weeks, which will allow you to see how my medication is going more long-term. :) Inkpen2 (talk) 18:49, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, was I winding you up? Maybe you should take a few breaths and since I've said I'm sorry, then you should accept that and give me another chance. --Gwib -(talk)- 18:58, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
- Huji, you said on the AN to give you one good reason... is the above not enough? I am now on medication for my disorder, which means that I no longer have extreme mood swings or heavy depressions. My behaviour has improved so much since I have begun the treatment, and I am actually able to leave the house every day now (which was a great acheievement for me before, due to my disorder). please reply... Thank you. If anyone doesn't believe me I can try and scan a copy of my medication certification onto the computer and show it to you? I will admit to you that user:Crystalclearchanges was in fact me over at EN. I never, despite what you have said, denied this. I was always careful with my wording to make sure that I never said "I am not Iamandrewrice". If you check my contributions there, they were very good (apart from several page move mistakes I made), and I was even called the "Most Valuable Player" on one page there. The checkuser over at EN isn't right all the time though. There are several occaisions where it has identified accounts as "me" even though they weren't, because i have a dynamic IP address. If you would like evidence that i am on medication, I will take a picture of me with the certificate straight away if you want. Letting me back for a week's trial won't hurt anyone, would it? If i break the rules, then its simple... block me. But please give me a chance. I know that none of you here can understand exactly about the effects of Body Dysmorphic Disorder, but I am asking you to at least look at this from my view. I have, for about 5 years now, had an extreme psychological disorder which gave me bizarre mood swings, depression, and prone to suicide. I made many mistakes and mess-ups during that time. However, I actually took the courage to go to the doctor (which was very difficult for me, as I struggled to actually get out of the house) and seek treatment. The treatment worked, and for the first time in years, I can actually be like a normal person again. But you want to punish me for what I did when I still had the disorder. If its really neccessary, I will get my doctor to sign a slip which says that my behaviour is now non-disordered, and that I can work without disruption. Please don't carry on punishing me for a disorder which I have finally managed to end. Again, I'm sorry for what happened here before, but I can't undo it, and looking back in the past isn't going to help, and I know that many of you will not accept my appology, but I am telling you with a true heart, that I want to become accepted here, and i want to prove that I can be a good editor. Please just consider allowing me here for a week, and yes I promise to follow all the instructions given. If I have behaved during that time, then dont block me, but if I haven't, then block me immediately. Its not like I can disrupt anything here anyway, as my restrictions stop me from talking to non-admins. So shall I take a picture of the certificate? Inkpen2 (talk) 18:37, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
I quote from the Crystalclearchanges talk page:" "Not disrupting [edits]? Please. There was substantial abuse from this account, not even counting that by definition, every single edit was in violation of WP:SOCK and WP:BAN." I don't think that Benniguy will ever be able to become a useful editor here. Even after countless second chances, he continues to evade his block with IP's and sockpuppets both here and on EN Wiki. Almost 40% of his edits have been to talk pages and I am confident that every one of those 40% was meant to be disruptive. I share the same feelings as the user above and stand steady on an indefinite block along with a sysop protection of any talk page Benniguy might have access to. We will also have to be careful of the sockpuppets he will no doubt create, this already being discussed on the talk page of a sockpuppet. I quote from my own talk page at En Wiki: "If you think 7 IP's is bad you ain't seen nothing yet". --Gwib -(talk)- 06:37, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
- Fine, since you don't believe me, i feel i have no other option than to consult my doctor about this, and get him to write me a note. I honestly feel offended by your sentence here "Almost 40% of his edits have been to talk pages and I am confident that every one of those 40% was meant to be disruptive". Actually Gwib, over at EN, with Crystalclearchanges, if you do not think I was a good editor... go to "Latin Europe" there. Hardly any of my edits there were on people's talk pages. Almost all of my edits were to articles, and also article talkpages. Ask anyone on that page if they think I did well on it, and they will tell you yes. They are still working on the article, but I managed to clear up the page massively, and actually went to research myself about the html codes needed for what I was doing. Unless I receive an answer, I am going to go and speak to my doctor about this. All I am asking for is a trial of however long you decide, in which I must follow all the restrictions I am given. After that, then you can decide as you wish... but not giving me that chance since having started the medication with successful results is just mean in my oppinion, and I will be discussing this issue with him at my next session with him if you continue to propose I am still mentally unstable. Thank you.
- I have spoken to my doctor, and he says that he will happily sign a slip about this to show a "positive substantial recognized change in behaviour since medication". Do you require me to get him to go to Ashford and speak to his college there about it, as this is what he is going to do, on my request, until I hear any comments on the matter, so if you do not want me to do this, then please tell me. Thank you. Inkpen2 (talk) 18:04, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
- You know... it really would be helpful if you replied to me. I counted the numbers of supports at the AN for my unblock... and there are 6 for, and 6 against. This would appear to leave us split half and half. However, one thing that not so many of you may know about is that Razorflame told IuseRosary that he wasn't allowed to vote. Razorflame's view on my being blocked was orginally to let me have a trial, but then for some reason he changed (to support the opposite view to what IuseRosary supports). I am not sure if dissallowing an opposing vote like this is allowed? Barliner then informed Razorflame that IuseRosary had every right to vote if he wanted, so that means that technically, there are 7 for, and 6 against, which means that there are a greater number of people who support giving me a trial, than ignoring my request. Also, in addition to this, we are all being discussed on a site called "WikipediaReview"... yes... several of you have already been mentioned. There seems to be some support for me to be given a second chance there. Yes, i said a second chance, as although you have given me "chances" before, my disorder was still there. This would be the only real "second" chance for me to have on this site, as this is the first time since I have been on medication that I am asking for a chance. If you think about though, I don't see what harm giving me a trial for a set time period can be... if I misbehave, then block me again, but I don't see how you can judge either way until you actually give me a "second" chance. Thank you. And please reply so I know where I currently stand. Inkpen2 (talk) 09:24, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
- Gwib, you did not read the thread there properly. For a start, it wasn't me who said you "never really tried to help"... that is the opinion of someone else who is currently present on this wikipedia. I don't know who they are on here, but they are nothing to do with me, so dont tell me that you are sorry "I" feel that way, as the quote had nothing to do with me. And anyway, the first link that you gave me... it wasn't anything to do with me... that was where you were helping IuseRosary, not me. I acknowledge the fact that you did help me here greatly however, but some of your comments about my disorder higher up on this page were clearly unnacceptable, and Barliner acknowledged that too.
- I have spoken to my doctor earlier today, and they are going to travel to Ashford (about an hour's journey) to discuss (along with other things) with his collegue, writing me a slip as certified proof of my change in behaviour, to bring to this site.
- I would like to add one last comment. Somehow, the person who wrote the comment on Wikipedia Review, knew Tygrrr's full name (which I will not repeat). This suggests to me something more to do with Tygrrr has been involved with this user, and possibly this case.
- What should I do with the slip once I receive it from my doctor? Inkpen2 (talk) 17:22, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
- Since you dont think that I'm better from my medication, and are not sure whether to give me a trial or not... I have been thinking. How about I join some other kind of Wiki... and you can have a look at my contributions there for a while. If I seem to be doing OK there, then after a week or so, then you could consider giving me a trial here. Does that at least sound like a fair proposal?
- I am trying to prove to you as much as possible here. So at least work with me :) Inkpen2 (talk) 15:39, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
- Does everyone here think this is a fair proposal? I will work on the other wikipedia for 1-2 weeks, and then, if I do well there, you can accept me for a trial here with restrictions. If I do well during that, then you could let me stay. Is this reasonable? And SwirldBoy39, I clicked the link, and it said the page didnt exist... Inkpen2 (talk) 18:51, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
- I've created an account there (called Benniguy). Is this your own website? Could you help me find my way around a bit... its quite different from what I'm used to :p Inkpen2 (talk) 19:31, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
I can't speak for the other users here, but I doubt I would change my mind based on good behaviour on another wiki. It's very easy to behave for a week or two once you're focused, but once you're settled into a community your mindset changes. Right now, I don't believe that your behaviour would change. We give people lots of chances to prove us wrong when we think that normally, but there just has to be a cut-off point somewhere. Just my personal opinion of course, I'll post on the Admin Noticeboard to let others know of your proposal. Archer7 - talk 11:59, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
- Ok thank you Archer. Archer... please at least consider. Look at it this way. I misbehaved before because of my BDD depressionalistic mood swings. I went to the doctor to get it sorted out (which was a big psychological struggle for me to actually leave the house). I have a certified note from my doctor that my behaviour has now stabalized under the medication... and I even go to school again now that I have my confidence back. I understand that you may be wary about letting me back in caase what happened last time will repeat itself... but I am on medication this time. Anyway, since I realise that you may still need some kind of proof... I suggested a trial on this wikipedia under various restrictions... but you would not even budge to that, so I am now going completely out of my way to prove to you that I have changed, by even going to a completely new wiki. I said that I would edit there for a couple of weeks so you could see how I act there, and then make a decision as to whether or not give me a trial here... but yet you still say its not enough. If that is the case, then what exactly do you want me to do? I have tried to go as far as possible for you and have basically bent over backwards to meet your requirements. Can you at least just keep an open mind ok? I know I may just be another "statistic" to you... but imagine yourself in my position... i really really want to edit, and am prepared to do anything to prove that my behaviou has changed under medication... so please think of me as a real life person with genuine feelings here... I know thats kinda hard when there's a computer separating you, but my heart is set on becoming a good editor... for several reasons:
- I feel there are many many things I can do here, since this is such a small wikipedia, and there currently seem to be no other editors that edit the areas in which I would.
- I want to prove to myself that I am not "useless" as one user here once called me, as its a very disheartening thing to be called.
- and last but not least... i owe it to all the great people that have spent time on me trying to make me a better editor... Jeff being one of them.
- So can you at least keep your mind open to giving me a trial depending on how well I do at the other wiki... ok?
- Oh and by the way... the reason I do my edit summaries in caps is to make sure people will see them on the Recent Changes... since I have no way of actually talking to you on your own talk pages (well i do... but thats called sockpuppeting) :p Inkpen2 (talk) 12:43, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
I certainly sympathise with your situation - I cannot even begin to understand how difficult things must have been for you with BDD. I try to look at everyone individually and as a person, but in your case I don't know whether that was the main problem. That's why for me, I'm not really that concerned about whether you are/aren't on medication - what I have to think about is whether problems are likely to happen again. When I look at your editing history, I see things that I've seen before many times, and I think that things are just going to keep happening. I don't view bans as punishments, so don't take it personally, I just think that this site is not what you are looking for. You seem heavily interested in the community side of things and being creative with pages. Unfortunately, we are pretty strict about what we want, and the way we want it - that's the way an encyclopedia works. I think that you would be much happier on one of the many other community websites on the net that focus on building things in your own style - take up web design for example and join a web design forum. I do not think that many of your actions have been malicious (although you have made a few mistakes), I just think Wikipedia does not suit your interests at all and that more and more problems are going to arise from that for us to deal with. Archer7 - talk 13:33, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
- Well I thank you for understanding. But can you at least keep an open mind to see how I do for a couple of weeks on the other wiki? If I start to cause disruption on here if you do eventually let me back, then its not hard to just block me. Also, I know that the mood swings and intentional annoyance were due to the BDD... but I do admit that the "wanting to color in the page" stuff was probably my fault anyway... although perhaps I wouldnt have been so pushy if I was seeing with a clear mind anyway. I appologize for incidents like that, and I completely understand now that coloring the page to that extent was wrong. I would say that making the subheadings (the "Oppose" and "For" subtitles) red and green was not so bad, but the rest of what I did on the page went too far. I am perfectly happy with sticking to the rules that I am now (almost) in complete understanding of. What you have to remember is that I am still relatively new to wikipedia. Although I may have been editing since November, I never really got the chance to develop and learn all the rules properly as the whole time I was struggling with blocks, bans, and sockpuppetery etc. In this sense, I am all too experienced with learning how to evade blocks etc, which I think would come in handy when dealing with other similar users here in the future, as it takes one to know one ey ;) But I never really got the whole way through with learning even some of the simplest parts of wikipedia... I only not long ago realised that there was a "recent changes". It is for this reason that I hope you will treat me still with some kind of an open mind due to the fact that up until a short while ago, I was hardly accustomed to many of the rules. Jeff did try to teach me some back on EN, but we didnt get very far before "the incident". So can you at least tell me that you'll consider giving me a chance depending on how I do on the other wiki? Inkpen2 (talk) 13:45, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, I'm still not convinced that this is the place you're looking for. However, it's not up to me. It's all down to consensus here, so if a lot of users agree with your idea, then unblocking you may be a possibility. You'll need to wait now for responses from other users. Archer7 - talk 14:13, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
- I'm not trying to convince you here and now. I'm asking you to keep an open mind for when you assess me after I've been on the other wiki. Can you at least keep an open mind? that's all i'm asking. Inkpen2 (talk) 14:31, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
I'm sorry I haven't been editing there much yet. I'm approaching lots of exams and don't have as much time recently :( I will continue to work on that other wiki when i get more time. I have actually been given administratorship on that wiki, and haven't abused them, so even that in itself should hopefully be evidence that I'm not the same old "me". Well... email me on email@example.com if you need to ask me anything else. But in the meantime, please check up on me from time to time there so that you can assess how i'm doing. I am hoping that the fact I am going through all this just to prove my dedication will be evidence enough for you. If it isn't, then I'm really not sure what will be, and am worried that this may be little more than a personal grudge held by a few of you, even in spite of the fact that I have appologized for how I treated you when I was unmedicated, but apparently, that isn't enough for those of you who still think that my disorder is a "joke". Inkpen2 (talk) 19:05, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
- @Inkpen2: Maybe it's useful for you to look at this text, especially at points 6 and 7 to understand why it is so difficult for you to get back to SEWP. People will react on your changed habits more positive in real life than online. That's the great advantage of real life. - Best wishes for your exams! --Cethegus (talk) 08:59, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
I have been waiting for a month now! I am sorry but this is simply getting ridiculous. I have bent over backwards to meet your requirements. If I was going to cause trouble, I could just go and make a sockpuppet now couldnt I?! but no, I have been patient (for a month!). I have gone to the doctor to get him to travel miles to get me a slip signed. I have joined another wiki (and coped being given adminship) just to show you I can edit fine. I don't physically understand what else I can do anymore. It's not like i'm even asking for a definite yes. All I am asking for is a trial. A trial. It's hardly that demanding. Try and picture yourself in my position here... no really... imagine yourself being me: I had a disorder and it caused me to do things that I shouldn't have done... i then went and got medical attention to cure it... and it worked... and i have been patient for a month to prove to you that i am cured... yet you still won't even give me just a trial? Do none of you realise how unfair that is? I will continue editing at the other Wiki for the moment, but if you are telling me that even after that, I won't be allowed back here, then I might as well just give that up too! So now that I have been on medication for OVER a month, and been waiting for an unblock for around the same time period, I don't think it's that unreasonable for me to ask you all to consider giving me a trial. Thank you. Inkpen2 (talk) 12:05, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
- Just so you know, I support the unblocking of your account and have cast my vote here. --Andrew from NC (talk) 13:11, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Thank you Andrew :) This means the votes now stand as: (see bottom of page) I would like to mention something currently. About a month and a half ago, people left me these comments:
- "I have reviewed your unblock request and have decided not to unblock you at this time. Feel free to come back in a couple of months and request again, thank you. Oysterguitarist 20:52, 24 February 2008 (UTC)"
- "I'd have to agree with Jeffpw here. I think we can give him one final chance to do some good for this site. If he screws up, then that's it. Razorflame 17:02, 25 February 2008 (UTC)"
- "I am not in favour of unblocking today, but will be happy to do so when I hear how benniguy feels in a couple of weeks (not months)... --Bärliner 18:42, 25 February 2008 (UTC)"
well according to what you yourselves said, you would see if the medication was working a few weeks from then, and then put me on a trial if my medication had worked. Well... I am sure you will all agree that the time has gone on much longer than that. Surely it is overdue for this "trial" that you said to me that you would give me? Please write back
- You've already been asked not to use our real names here and as a token of respect, we don't use yours. Please remove the name above.
- This unblocking is a serious issue. I want to see that you've read over all the points made on the administrators noticeboard and I think that a foolproof way of doing this is for you to get a small quote from each user above to prove that they do indeed support or oppose your unblocking rather than just give us a collection of links to the same topic.
- I don't doubt that they support or oppose you, but a quote for each user would give us:
- More insight into what they have said
- More insight into how they showed their arguments (even if it was just a "as per arguments above
- Concrete evidence that you read each sentence to get specific quotes and therefore will have a wide range of the feelings about you on SEWP.
- Show us how much you really want to become a serious editor
- If you want to be unblocked, I seriously think that this is a necessary step and you should do it ASAP without asking any questions, making reasons as to why you shouldn't do this or even posting a reply at all until you've finished finding an individual quote for each user. --Gwib -(talk)- 14:16, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
I have just found the individual quotes for each user :) that's what i've just been replacing. If you click on the links now, they go to the direct quote of each person... that's what you mean, right? Inkpen2 (talk) 14:19, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
- No, you just went through the page history and copied the URL. What I wanted was a small quote, such as this:
- "I support/oppose Benniguy because of ..."
- A short quote for each user means that you will have knowledge of why they support or oppose you (since you will have had to read what they wrote) and you will have to read each arguement to get appropriate quotes. Simply going through a page history isn't learning anything.
- If you simply copy and paste the "diff" from above, then that won't count either since you will be doing exactly the same thing as above. You just need a small sentence or two highlighting somewhere why that particular user thinks the way he/she does. --Gwib -(talk)- 14:32, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Gwib, is the one that i've done so far right? And no "Andrew from NC" is not me. You say that he was on Wikipedia De. I am presuming that means german wikipedia. I don't even speak german. Do a checkuser please. Inkpen2 (talk) 15:19, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
I have checked his English wikipedia (i couldn't understand the German), and saw that his contributions start on 1st April, and the he edits Christian only articles. I'm sorry, but suggesting that he is even anything to do with me is ridiculous. Since when have I ever edited any religious articles here? never (from my memory anyway). Inkpen2 (talk) 15:35, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
- If it's not you then it will show on the checkuser, and that'll be the end of that. Oysterguitarist 15:39, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Ok everyone, can you please check the votes at the bottom of the page. Gwib, I have done what you asked me to; I read through the reasons people gave for and against my unblock, and quoted the most important bits. Tygrrr, you say on Simple Talk that this isn't a "numbers game", but you're not looking at the most up to date vote result, which is below, where there is a 12 for and 8 against result. I think the 12 for clearly provides consensus. I have been on this medication for months now, and my request for unblock has been open around one and a half months. If i was going to cause trouble right now, I would have edited using a sockpuppet would I not? If you want me to show further proof, would you like me to log out of this account, and edit this page (which I am allowed, as a blocked user is allowed to edit their talk page) from my IP address so you can block that one too? surely the fact that I am so willing to surrender my IP address for you to block so I can show who I am must prove something to you? Anyway, the votes clearly indicate there is a significant majority vote for me. A 150% times as much as there is against me. Inkpen2 (talk) 13:45, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
- Tygrrr, you said that you don't want me back because productivity basically stopped before while I was here. But the whole reason of this trial is to see if now that I am on medication, whether things will be the same. I'm only asking for a trial, just so you can see how I've changed. If you don't think I have, then by all means block me in an instant... but for the moment, can you just keep an open mind for me, ok? :) Inkpen2 (talk) 15:07, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
As much as you'd like it to be, it's not just about the numbers. Ultimately, a decision will be made one way or the other as to whether or not you'll be allowed back on a trial basis. The decision will take into consideration all comments and all facts as we know them. This "voting" is really only to get a clearer picture of where members of the community stand on the issue. The "results" will not be "law". This is not an RfA, RfD, proposal for VGA, or similar official vote where there is a set percentage of support that must be reached. · Tygrrr... 15:20, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
- Well i understand that. However, I am trying to prove to you as far as i can that i am different. I went to my doctor to get him to sign a slip to show that he thinks its ok for me to come back to the site, but then people here told me i wasn't allowed to upload the image with my details on. i have offered to edit this page on my IP address just so you can block any of my currently unblocked IP ranges as a guesture to show just how serious i am about behaving here. i have now joined PBS kids wiki (run by User:SwirlBoy39), and have been given adminship there, and managed to behave with it, as i'm sure he'll tell you. If none of this is enough, i'm not really sure what else you could possibly want me to do. I may join simple wiktionary if thats another requirement you want me to fulfill, but I am trying to bend over backwards for you here, proving that I am now different now that I am on medication, and my doctor and I BOTH promise the same thing won't happen again (and that is a medical oppinion), and joining other wikis. I am sorry for the things i did here before, and i have said this countless times, (you were even the first person Tygrrr, that i mentioned in my appology at the top of this page) but the only way i can really make this up is by bringing to the site my own contributions. Will you at least keep an open mind Tygrrr, to see how I do on the PBS kids wiki, or on simple wiktionary? Inkpen2 (talk) 15:30, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
- But you're saying that you won't give me a trial... so you're already telling me that I don't even have any kind of chance to proove myself... so you've already closed your mind to even allowing me to try to improve. And my doctor wrote an official medical note saying my behaviour is ok to return to this site. Inkpen2 (talk) 15:57, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
- If that's the case, then after I've been on simple wiktionary and PBS Kids wiki for a few more days, then you'd trial me, right? Inkpen2 (talk) 16:09, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
- He has Gwib done a lot. Please, he can be trusted now. PLEASE give him a chance! SwirlBoy39 18:16, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Umm thank you for the support SwirlBoy ;) lol. So Gwib, what else do you want me to do now? I am editing on simple wiktionary right now by the way, and have edited on the PBS kids wiki some more today if people want to check the contributions there so far? Inkpen2 (talk) 18:28, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
- Please stop with the all cap edit summaries and the unneeded extra stuff you add in them, or I will protect this page again. Oysterguitarist 22:48, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi. Ok, but the reason I have been putting my edit summaries in capital letters is to try to get your attention, as this is the only way I can contact you... as I can't talk on your talkpages... Inkpen2 (talk) 17:42, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
- This comment is in reply to the comments on Simple Talk. Ok, first of all... Archer... no, I dont see this as a "challenge". The reason I am requesting an unblock here and taking it so seriously is because I am banned at EN, whereas here, I am only indefinitely blocked, and therefore, if I want to try to edit soon (which I really do want to), then it is here that I will have to try. The votes are currently 12 for my return, 8 against. I think that would surely at least warrant some kind of acknowledgement? The trouble is, you are only looking at the bad things I did last time. If you ignore the bad behaviour last time, I actually edited a lot of articles. My return this time will not have the behavioural issues... so basically... the one reason why you are unsure whether to have me back is solved anyway. I am currently at simple.wiktionary under the supervision of Tygrrr1. I am also at PBS kids wiki under the supervision of SwirlBoy39 (and have been given adminship there). Please stop thinking that I'm just here to cause trouble. And Gwib, I really really do not understand your strong dislike of me. You told me to go get the quotes for the votes, and I did exactly what you asked. Then, when I asked you what to do next, you left me a patronising comment. I know I may not be popular amongst some of the users here (although in fact the votes show the opposite way round), but can you stop holding a grudge against me and look at me as an actual person. I am trying so hard to prove my worth here. Oh... and if you would like another reason why I want so much to edit wikipedia (in addition to the fact that I feel I can contribute, and that its fun, and the reasons you do), it is partially because I want to prove to my old wikipedia mentor, Jeffpw, that I can do this. I let him down time and time again, and he even stopped me from killing myself when I was affected by the disorder. It was Jeff that supported me through everything, and convinced me to get medication. I would not be here today if it were for him. I want to prove to him, and everyone else, that now I am better, that I can be a good editor. I have learnt so much through all my experiences, and I am sure you will realise, if nothing else, that my writing style has changed, as I no longer have mood swings or depression. So remember... i'm a person too, sitting behind this computer... not just a statistic appearing on your computer. Inkpen2 (talk) 18:21, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
For my unblock (11):
(Due to "the change brought on by" benniguy's "various medication" Barliner "propose allowing" him "to return for a two week evaluation" under certain condictions.)
(Da Punk "fully support letting disabled and the like editing this Wikipedia", especially with the fact that benniguy has edited here successfully: "this", which "furthur warrants" his unbanning.)
(Eptalon thinks the trial "looks like a workable idea", as benniguy gets his "chance for a comeback", but also, it doesnt affect anyone else badly either, as everyone gets a "means to see that this trial does not go on forever")
(Lights "support this proposal" of a trial, but if benniguy hasn't shown during it that he is different, then the indefinite block "should be placed again")
(Cometstyles gives "Support", as long as benniguy doesn't repeat the same mistakes as last time)
(Jeffpw says he doesn't think letting benniguy "try once again could really hurt anything", as he "seem sincere". Jeffpw says "it seems both petty and rather cruel to continue to punish somebody who has had a medical condition and is now being treated", as blocks are supposed to prevent bad behaviour, not punish it)
(ChristianMan says that as someone who has gone through what benniguy has, they understand that a "second or third chance" can be such "difference makers", and that benniguy should be let on for a "two week evaluation")
(IuseRosary "supports" letting benniguy back, but if his "treatment fails" and he goe back to his "old self, the ban should be placed again". However, IuseRosary says this shouldn't happen because from what he's seen of benniguy in real life, "everything has been gong well so far")
(SamEV encountered benniguy's sockpuppet (Crystalclearchanges) at EN wikipedia, and "recently worked with him at EN", "and found him to be a positive contributor". Based on SamEV's "personal experience" with benniguy on wikipedia, and through "email communications with him" SamEV believes benniguy "deserves this last chance" "since he's promised" "he'll behave and is taking his medication")
(Andrew thinks "it sounds as if he has made improvments", and thinks benniguy should be given "another chance and see how he does" )
(SwirlBoy thinks that "Ben can be given a chance", as he can tell that he is a "good guy" and that "he wants to do good".)
(From "looking at his talk page", Chenzw can see that benniguy "really regrets his actions".)
Against my unblock (8):|
(Snake thinks that "Benninguy has been given too many chances" when he wasn't on medication and that "its unlikely he'll ever change")
Creol says that he thinks Benniguy can bring "nothing good", as "Benniguy was blocked for being a disruption", as "his actions caused nearly every active" user to have to dedicate time to him. Although he is "recently medicated and is now all better", the extent to which he is better is unclear, as he recently made a sockpuppet (Crystalclearchanges) on EN wikipedia. At simple wikipedia, a few months ago, he "created an account as a friends house" "to evade the block".)
Oysterguitarist says he looked at the "unblock request" when it was posted originally, "and have decided not to unblock at this time", but that benniguy should come back in "a couple of months and request again" (which is around the date we are at today)
(Tygrrr says she "agree with Snake and Creol's" ideas because Simple English practically ceased all productivity when Benniguy was here)
(Archer says that he thinks benniguy "obviously just doesn't like editing articles that much" "and the same problems will recur")
(Gwib says he will back up Snake and Creol's comments.)
(Huji says he opposes for the same "reasoning" that "Tygrrr gave")
(Says he opposes "per reasons given by Archer7, Snake311, Tygrrr et al.")
Seriously now[change source]
I am asking now to give Benniguy a chance here! I find it crazy that we are bickering over one user here! Unblock him if he vandalizes even once block and/or ban. If not great, we get another great contributor. Honestly, if he was going to be a vandal would he be working this hard to be unblcoked? Geez. All you opposers of unblock and supporters please see my wiki and his contribs! This argument needs to end! We are practically torturing the guy here! Anybody agree with me? SwirlBoy39 21:24, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
- We're not concerned about vandalism, we're concerned about disruption (at least I am). No offense, but you weren't here when he was actively editing. You don't really know how this place practically shut down to answer questions, bicker, and deal with almost constant disruption and distraction. No way should one user be allowed to cause so much chaos. And despite keeping an open mind and hoping to see evidence of change, I personally haven't seen anything to indicate that he's capable to constructively editing and not chatting and wasting others' time while doing it. The tricky thing about allowing a trial is that he doesn't ever do "just one thing". Even while blocked the disruption he's causing is ridiculous. I do agree with one thing you said though: "I find it crazy that we are bickering over one user here!" You're absolutely right, it is crazy. And allowing a trial would just lead to more craziness, in my humble opinion. · Tygrrr... 21:47, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
- "See his contributions"? 17 edits (over half are in the user/user talk namespace) and admin on a wiki with only one user that would even approach the definition of active (the user whose talk page accounts for most of his edits there). This is not only not showing a history of useful contributions, but it is showing no change in past habits. He is more interested in talking than writing. I agree with Tygrrr and will add my agreement with another point you make. "This argument needs to end". 6 weeks with no consensus and no consensus in sight. This disruption need to end now. -- Creol(talk) 01:10, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
- And how exactly is he supposed to edit in article space if he is blocked? Why don't you just forgive his past errors (I am not denying that he was wrong) and give him another chance. And if he blows it, you block him indefinably and put a nice big "I told you so" on the talk pages of everyone who voted to unblock him. --Andrew from NC (talk) 05:43, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
- (to Andrew from NC) Creol is referring to Benniguy's edits on the PBS Kids site. There are only 17, and over half are to talk pages, showing that he's not changed his past habits of using wikis as chat sites. Also as to "Why don't you just forgive his past errors and give him another chance?" We just explained why that's a bad idea. Again, no offense, but like Swirlboy, you don't really have any idea what things were like when he was editing here. It's easy for you (and others who weren't here) to "forgive and forget" because you don't have anything to forgive or forget--we do. We could forgive if we'd seen change that his editing habits have changed. They haven't--they're still disruptive. It's also pretty hard to forget what's still occurring. There's just not going to be consensus to bring him back. Let's bring this to a close and move on with our lives. · Tygrrr... 13:37, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
- I would have to concur with Tygrrr in this instance. This place really did shut down when he was unblocked. He caused much disruption and to tell you the truth, I was the one who agreed to mentor him here and to tell you the truth, he spit it right back at me. I was trying to mold him into a more appropriate user here, and to tell you the truth, it didn't work. I would have to say that in no way would a small community ever be a good port for his energy. He just simply isn't ready for it. Maybe in a few years he will be ready to come back, but for now, I cannot see him editing here. I'm sorry, but that's just the way it is. Cheers, Razorflame 13:42, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
- There is also the case over at En Wiki, where when he was unblocked, given a mentor and all sockpuppets neatly filed away, continued to create sockpuppets such as Crystalclearchanges. Even there, someone described his edits from that account as ""Not disrupting [edits]? Please. There was substantial abuse from this account, not even counting that by definition, every single edit was in violation of WP:SOCK and WP:BAN".
- He also, after his unblocking, treated his assigned mentor Jeffpw with disrespect, not taking any of his suggestions seriously. I think that his continual disruption has to end now. But I do give him some credit that he has, even after being blocked, still managed to halt SEWP while we read his, sometimes even abusive, plea. --Gwib -(talk)- 15:10, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
- Support again SwirlBoy39 23:34, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
My very long response[change source]
To everyone: Inkpen2 has been blocked for over a month. He has apologized time and time again and there is no way anyone will know how he will behave unless he is unblocked. As I have said before, he is going to be watched like a hawk by everyone if he is unblocked. If he makes just one mistake he will be re-blocked before you can say “told you so.” There is no way he could do hardly any harm to Wikipedia because you are going to be ready to block him at a moments notice.
To Tygrrr: You have said that you are tired of repeating yourself. Well, so am I. But I will repeat myself again. You have said that, like Swirlboy, I have no idea what it was like when he was editing. But, as I have said above, if he were to be unblocked, all the admins would have their fingers on the trigger. If he makes just one mistake he will be blocked in the blink of an eye and the trouble will end.
As far as voting goes, you have said, “This "voting" is really only to get a clearer picture of where members of the community stand on the issue.” Now you are in favor of just dropping the issue entirely. Why would you want to find out where to community stands if you were just going to ignore the results and drop the issue?
To Gwib: Why would you get his hopes up if you have no intention of unblocking him? He has done everything you have asked. He compiled the list of comments from twenty different editors. But all you have said is that your mind is open. Either tell him what else you would like him to do (although he has already done enough) or change your vote to unblock. You seem to be quite enjoying these mind games. But they aren’t funny.
To Creol: Just because Inkpen doesn’t have many contributions on the PBS wiki doesn’t mean he couldn’t contribute here. Honestly, how much information can you really put on a wiki about PBS? There aren’t many people who even care about that kind of thing, much less know enough to make a website about it.
To Razorflame: You said, "I'd have to agree with Jeffpw here. I think we can give him one final chance to do some good for this site. If he screws up, then that's it.” But now, after Inkpen has gone out of his way to show how much he wants to be unblocked, you are singing a different tune. You so desperately want to be an administrator that you are sucking up to the admins by agreeing with them on everything. Please actually think this through for yourself. You said that he should have a final chance and then you put your foot in your mouth. Why?
To Bärliner: you said, "I am not in favour of unblocking today, but will be happy to do so when I hear how benniguy feels in a couple of weeks (not months).” It has been more than a couple of weeks. He seems to be doing much better with his medication. I see that your name is under the unblock section above. If only more admins would be as open minded as you!
To Swirlboy: I am sorry to hear that you have switched to neutral. There is no reason to do that, as Inkpen has done nothing wrong. He isn’t using his talk page to pout, cause a disruption, or anything else like that. He is using it as his only way of communicating with other users. I hope you will reconsider.
- Sorry? I again reconsidered...I'm locked on unblock and one chance. Think of how YOU would feel in this situation people, please! SwirlBoy39 23:33, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
To MindTheGap: As EchoBravo has said, your comments about Creation and evolution were uncalled for and will not make anyone else agree with you. The fact that you make personal attacks like this make me question your judgment.
To Da Punk '95, Eptalon, Lights, Cometstyles, Jeffpw, ChristianMan16, SamEV, and Chenzw: You have all been silent for a while. If you would still like to see Inkpen unblocked then please weigh in and let everyone know. And for those of you who are admins, please consider letting the other admins know if you would be willing to patrol Inkpens edits for a while once he has been unblocked. That might help set them at ease.
- I have came out of retirement, and still support the unban. I also would watch Inkpen2 edits, and either get admin access/get a admin to block (if needed) -- Da Punk '95 talk 06:01, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
And finally, to Inkpen2: If you really want to be unblocked, you should be making every effort to prove it to these stubborn admins. I know that you have done more than enough to warrant your unblocking, but it is going to take a huge effort to convince them.
In summation, all this discussion could end if he was just given one more chance. If he turns out to be a good editor, which I really think he would, then the conversation would be over. If he turns out to be a bad editor, then you block him and that’s the end of that. If he is not given a chance then the discussion is not likely to end anytime soon.
Thank you for reading this. Hopefully this will be the last comment I, or anyone else, will have to make regarding this matter. Many people have said that they would like to end this quickly, and I agree. But ignoring it will not make it end. Please give Inkpen a chance.
If anyone would like to ask anything of me, please feel free to do so below or on my talk page.
- Oh my gosh, so much has happened on my talk page while I was away. I'm not sure whether I should be thankful to you all for taking the time to discuss me, or whether I should be appologizing for this amount of time having to be spent on me. Regardless, I am very grateful for those who support me either way. Well, there are several issues I must address here.
- On PBS Kids Wiki, I admittedly have not done much editing there (yet). The reason for this is that my current efforts are mainly on the discussions going on about me here, and also the revision for my exams coming up. However, one thing that you CAN check to see if I've improved, is to go see my simple wiktionary edits. Although i've only been there a couple of days, I have made several edits already, and under the guidance of Tygrrr, have managed to grasp the workings of the system. If you ask Tygrrr herself, she will tell you that I have currently posed as no problem there. And I'm sure SwirlBoy will tell you the same thing about PBS Kids Wiki.
- Another note about the PBS wiki is that SwirlBoy actually made me an administrator there. I initially said that I did not feel ready to become this, but SwirlBoy said he wasn't sure how to undo it. So I agreed to keep the administrator status. If I was going to be a disruption at all, surely I would have used this as the first chance to cause vandalism or anything else, for as an admin, I could have blocked people, deleted pages etc... but I didn't use my administrator tools once. Not a single time. In fact, as a test, SwirlBoy blocked me there for 3 days (not as a punishment for anything... just as a test), to see if I would use my admin tools to unblock myself. However, I didn't. Again, surely this shows that I am not here to cause disruption.
- Now... onto the EN sockpuppet case. Yes, I did make Crystalclearchanges there. However, this was after I had been told by Jeffpw that if I made a new account and started afresh, I could hopefully forget about my other old past. I was also told a similar thing a while back by EconomicsGuy, who told me that if I just come back quietly, people wouldn't notice who I was, and I could start again. So I did exactly this with that username. However, as I edited the same articles as before (Latin Europe, Malta, etc...), one user (Whitstable) noticed who I was. Whitstable sent me a message telling me something along the lines of that if I was banned, he didn't mind, as long as I didn't repeat the same actions again. In case other users saw this message from him, I then had to clear my talk page, but the only way I could do that without causing suspicion was to replace my talk page with a "retired" label. Whitstable saw that I had done this, and apparently thought I was doing it just to cause disruption. So he checked my contributions, and saw that a portion of my changes were to Page Moves. These page moves were things like moves from "Africans in Italy" to "African Italians", so as you can see, it was not meant to be disruptive. however, some editors thought that these moves were incorrect, so undid them all, telling me on my talk page to discuss on the discussion pages next time. Whitstable, checking the history of my talk page, saw these comments, and assumed that this meant I had been doing something bad. So Whitstable, despite his claim before that he didn't mind who I was, went to request a checkuser to see if I was Iamandrewrice. Despite one person's claim that my response "no" during the discussion about me, meant that I was denying I was "Iamandrewrice", I in fact made sure never to once say that I wasnt Iamandrewrice, as I knew this would get me more in trouble. So I waited, and the checkuser results came back as positive (not that this is neccessarily anything to go by, as there are many many accounts over at EN that the checkuser claimed as positive that I have never even heard of), but yes, it was me. If you don't believe that my contributions there were good, ask SamEV, the person who I actually worked alongside the most with there. In fact, check this out: , where I was actually called the "most valuable player" (mvp) on the Latin Europe article. Despite the fact that yes, I was breaking my ban, my edits there were actually good and very helpful this time.
- Of course I regret that fact that I had to actually violate my ban in order to edit there, but two established users there advised me to do it, and several users there have a grudge on me for what happened before, and I wanted to edit without having to be the subject of everyone's hate. Let me just point something out to you: When people didn't know what my history was, they called me the "most valuable player" and countless other compliments... but when they knew who I was, then it all changed. I think this tells you something... it is not actually my editing skills now that makes your oppinion of me bad... it is your oppinions of me that you made towards me before I sought medication. You are holding something against me that I right now wouldn't have done. All those choices I made when I wasn't under medication... they weren't things that I chose to do conciously... they were things that my depression and moodswings caused by the disorder made me do. If you give me a trial, you will be able to see my ratio of mainspace to talk page edits, and then assess fairly. At the moment, you are just basing all your evidence on what happened before. I have appologized, i have joined other wikis, i have matched every request by every user so far (Gwib in particular, with his many requests), only to be told that you can't trust me because what I did before when I wasn't on medication now means that now that I am on medication, you don't care. And also, with regards to the numbers of the votes... the current vote is 12 for my return, 8 against, yet you tell me this isn't enough? If this was the other way round, you would have this discussion closed and my talkpage protected in an instant. But those users who are in the minority are letting their own oppinions get in the way of the majority vote here. Yes, some of those users who voted for my return were not here when I was last here unmedicated, but that means they are actually looking at this more fairly... as they are basing their judgement mainly on how they can see me behaving now, whereas the others are basing their oppinions on what happened before. If a block is supposed to be used to stop vandalism, and NOT for punishment, then those people who are basing their oppinions on what happened before, and are "punishing" me, are not realising what a block is for. Those users who were not involved before, but who can see my behaviour now, have the fairest oppinions, as they are the ones who are not using the block as "punishment" (as this is not what block is for), they are basing their judgement on whether or not they think my state of behaviour now will be ok for the wikipedia. Thank you again to all those who are supporting me through this.
- Oh, and one last point... Gwib states that I am still being "abusive" in my request for unblock here. Please point out to me where I have been in anyway abusive. In fact Gwib, it is you who has been the abusive one towards me, by:
- saying to user:IuseRosary that my disorder is "hilarious".
- telling me that my disorder isn't any more important than the fact that you fancy(/fancied) a girl who didn't know you liked her.
- telling me that I can never be a good editor here because I may "forget to take my medication".
- Anyway, this has been a very long comment, I hope you will all read it. Inkpen2 (talk) 10:07, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
- "Majority" does not equal "consensus" - there's just not enough support votes to completely outweigh the opposes.
- We're all very tired of this discussion now. I understand that you want to be unblocked, but after weeks there has been no consensus. The line has to be drawn somewhere.
- Benniguy - It's not just me that thinks that the medication is irrelevant - we can see indications of the same behaviour simply in your communication style. We give people chances when we see different behaviour. The reason I personally don't like "trials" in your case is that I believe it basically restarts the entire cycle of blocked-"I'm sorry"-unblocked-blocked again etc. People that have been here for a while and have dealt with a lot of people can spot things in your communication that aren't obvious to others - we are not basing it all on your previous behaviour.
- We give chances to pretty much everyone, but there comes a point where we're just sick of it. It's reached that point now. Making a massive effort to convince us "stubborn admins" is likely to make us more annoyed when we're thinking like that. It may be reconsidered in the future, but not now.
- This has gone on for over a month now with no end in sight. In that time, there has been absolutely no new information provided to support unblocking - it's just the same arguments repeated over and over again. Even the users that support unblocking say that in the event of no consensus being reached, the block should remain in place. This discussion is causing a lot of disruption and nothing is changing. A few people have said that a bureaucrat should make the decision - there is no new evidence and I cannot think of anything else that anyone could provide that could possibly sway the vote. It's got to be closed by someone - Benniguy will remain blocked.
- This does not mean that it will not be reconsidered in the future, but that the current arguments have to stop. I'm beginning to feel a bit like Jerry Springer giving a "final thought" here, but we can't let this carry on out of control, it's got to end here. There is no consensus and there most likely never will be. Until next time, take care of yourselves, and each other. Archer7 - talk 11:31, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
- I understand that you want to get this finished with, but if a decision is made either way, surely it is to give me a trial, since that is the majority vote? That way, you CAN see properly whether or not my behaviour has changed, whereas currently, despite what you say, you can't "tell" how I am. And by the way, it wasn't me that called you "stubborn admins". And no, THIS is what is causing it to go round in circles. Oysterguitarist told me to reapply for my unblock after a couple of months... which is exactly what i did. now you are telling me that in your oppinion, I should wait longer. Well i'm sorry but this is getting beyond a joke... i have been messed around left right and centre, and it seems apparent you're not even reading any of the above discussion anyway. Inkpen2 (talk) 11:53, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
- Please read the above. There is not a consensus for a trial. Some of the users that voted were not involved, and therefore their votes do carry less weight in order to be fair - I have not discounted their comments entirely, but it is clear from their comments that some users that have voted in support without a full examination of everything. Their comments were certainly worthwhile, but the ones that were involved have a greater knowledge of your personality which is crucial in making such a judgement. That is why we work on consensus rather than majority. I have read every single comment everywhere and followed this discussion as it progressed - it's not going anywhere. It is true that I cannot tell whether you will behave in your trial, but working from past experience I believe the likelihood of success is extremely small. Remember that the votes from the rest of the community will make the decision - my opposition alone had little effect on the decision. I agree that you've been dragged around quite a lot, but taking all that into account I believe there is nothing that could possibly make any difference on the overall outcome. It is unfair on you (and definitely us) to drag this on any longer. This discussion has now been closed, please don't start all this off again - although I don't want to, I will protect your talk page if it carries on. I am leaving it unprotected to allow reasonable discussion from the community, not to have the same arguments repeated for the 467th time. Archer7 - talk 12:43, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
- I am afraid to say that despite the fact we are in the majority, those minority are being particularly forceful with their views and are not prepared to even put me on a trial so that they can actually see my editing patterns. Don't worry SwirlBoy, I will continue to work on your wiki, and on simple wiktionary. Also, if you would like to email me, its firstname.lastname@example.org I hope that I will be back in time to vote in your upcoming RFA ;) Unfortunately, I am missing the opportunity to participate in the discussion about IuseRosary's current one. I will be back in another month to continue this request. In the meantime, I will work under Tygrrr's wing at the wiktionary. Please do not protect this page as it is my only (allowed) way of communications. When I eventually get unblocked here, I would like to start a WikiProject Europe and a WikiProject Languages, as these are primarily where my interests lie. My WikiProject Europe will encompass many other projects, and they will be absorbed into it, and they will form a federal WikiProject that I hope to make the largest WikiProject Simple Wikipedia has ever seen :) One of my main aims within this WikiProject Europe will be on WikiProject Greater Italia, which will include Italy, San Marino, Malta, Vatican City, Italian Switzerland, Italian France, Italian Greece, and Italian Croatia. I think this alone will tell you that my stance on life has changed since my treatment for my disorder has begun, as before, my main issues were on "Fashion" and "Beauty" articles, something which my Body Dysmorphic Disorder compelled me to obsess about, as I could not stop thinking about my own body image, but now, I am able to think of things outside of this, which is why my main concentration has shifted to Pan-European articles, and languages. Inkpen2 (talk) 21:37, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
- I will continue to speak to you at PBSW and here, also on email. Please activate email at PBSW. Also, you said "I hope that I will be back in time to vote in your upcoming RFA" and I have a question...Lol when is my upcoming RFA? I see it no time soon. Thanks man for everything! SwirlBoy39 21:44, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
- Note: Hey join TTW! I don't know if you can since your a "vandal" but if you can great! Also get an IRC nick! SwirlBoy39 21:47, 11 April 2008 (UTC) :)
I've been thinking maybe...and I admire your support. Your the first person to say that. I had a previous RFA and failed miserably. Its just a Test Wiki where you can become an admin.
- How long would you suggest? And also, something came to my attention earlier:  This is an edit made by EconomicsGuy, a respected editor at EN wiki. In it, he tells me that someone who is indefinitely blocked may start up again on another account, but someone who is banned however may not. Since I am only indefinitely blocked here at simple wiki, then according to this, I am allowed to create another account, as long as the new account was "solely used for constructive edits". So if I go and make another account now, you can't block me as long as my edits are constructive... is that right? Inkpen2 (talk) 14:47, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
- As far as I know, according to Archer7 up there a ways, he says that you remain blocked because as far as I know, we will never achieve concensus on this issue. I do not know if that means you are banned from here or just indefinitely blocked, but if I were you, I wouldn't create another account here; even if it was used solely for constructive edits, I doubt that it would last very long before it is blocked. My advice to you, as your mentor, is to just move on and not create any more accounts here. Please' heed this advice, it will be the last advice I ever give you as a mentor. Razorflame 14:55, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
- At English wikipedia, yes, I am now banned (that edit by economicsguy was left before I was banned by the way), but on simple wikipedia I am just indefinitely blocked. This is because there is support by a section of the community not to have me blocked. When this is the case, someone is indefinitely blocked... and not banned. And also, the decision was never to "ban" me in the first place here... And according to these rules, as long as my new account does not cause disruption, then it can remain. By the way razorflame, I left you a message at PBS Kids Wiki ;) Inkpen2 (talk) 14:59, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
- Any account you create will be a sockpuppet and blocked indef for being used to evade a block. The difference between an indef block and a ban are semantics. You have gone through the measures outlined in the banning policy page. It says, "Users who remain indefinitely blocked after due consideration by the community are considered "banned by the Wikipedia community". I am going to protect this page to end your disruption here, I've had enough. - 15:01, 15 April 2008 (UTC)