User talk:Gobbleswoggler/Archive 3

Your talk page has been archived

Your talk page has been archived. Kayau Voting IS evil 11:00, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Maturity

This is a follow-up of this discussion.
I'd like to think I'm an extremely patient person; however, I don't like to be made fun of. I offered to adopt you, in order to help you to better understand the use of CSD tags and you accepted; however, you keep on tagging articles, as can easily be seen just taking a cursory look at your contributions.
I think there's a serious maturity issue, here: when you agree to something, you should do it, even if, later, you find yourself thinking it's a drag; so I'm terminating this adoption as of now. Clearly, you're always welcome on my talk page, if you need any help. Salvio ^{Let's talk 'bout it!} 12:28, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Archive

It looks like someone already took care of this! Sorry I couldn't get to it yesterday! sohmc (talk) 13:05, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

If you use {{archives}} instead of the manual archive box you are currently using, it will automatically add new archives to the box as they are created. Also, if you use {{talkarchivenav}} at the top of your archive pages it adds a snazzy navigation bar that can be very handy as your archive pages add up. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:13, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Adoption and more

Regarding this request, please keep in mind that adoption is much more about you as the person being adopted than it is about the adopter. You must display a willingness to accept input from others and act on it. I can't speak for anyone else, but it looks to me like you have a very difficult time with this. For example, it has taken many, many requests to get you to stop putting CSD tags on articles. From there, you moved on to new articles, where you have inappropriately removed a new article template, such as these:

• Bedan Plus: [1]
• Business Architecture - Building Blocks: [2]
• Rosbalt: [3]
• Omnis Network: [4]

In all four of those cases, all you did was remove the {{New unreviewed article}} template; you didn't actually review the article, or if you did, you did so incorrectly. For example, just looking specifically at the last one, when you removed the template, what you left behind was an article that started out with New article name, which shows you aren't really familiar with the purpose of the template. In addition, Omnis Network doesn't appear to meet any criteria for inclusion in the encyclopedia, but of course that's a different story. I would expect any new article reviewer to either improve the article so that it appears to meet criteria, or else to nominate it for deletion (either WP:CSD, WP:PROD, or WP:AFD, as appropriate).

So, in summary, the best advice you can follow around here is the advice you've gotten most frequently since you showed up: look at what other people are doing and learn how Wikipedia works. That is the best way to contribute.  Frank  |  talk  14:11, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Red links

Not all red links need to be removed. Please read Wikipedia:Red link.  Frank  |  talk  00:50, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

"Strange comment"

Hi. The "strange comment" you just removed from this talk page appears to have been in response to a warning you gave to that IP editor (it could have been a different editor) on June 5 - see User talk:117.201.51.135. As a suggestion, if you get replies on your Talk page and you don't know what they're about, it can often be helpful to check the person's Talk page - responses often come in very late, and I often have to check things myself, because I can't always remember who I've been talking to. And having checked, I see that IP did indeed edit the article "Tongue" and you reverted his edit as vandalism, but it clearly wasn't vandalism - you really do need to be careful when you mark other people's edits as vandalism. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:35, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Adoption?

Umm..I'd be happy to adopt you but you have 13,241 edits, much more then the 2,604 I have. May I ask why you want to be adopted first? Derild4921☼ 18:01, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

I have been advised to be adopted to improve my tagging pages skills.Gobbleswoggler (talk) 18:03, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Well, I have read through some of your past conflicts with other users and adopters. As you commonly mention that you are only 12, I will now mention I am only 13. CSD is a tricky topic and you will see on my talk page two of taggins were also wrong. However, CSD is a tool to help get rid of the articles that are obviously not needed and should have almost no reason to keep. I need to know what you have read and do know about CSD tagging, what articles you have read and questions you have. However, I am willing to adopt you! :) Derild4921☼ 18:30, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

I have read on how to tag pages more accurately.Would you consider nominating me for adminship?,Gobbleswoggler (talk) 18:36, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Dude, can you please knock it off with the adminship? Please? Don't even think about it for at least a year and a couple DYKs. Thank you. Tommy! [message] 18:38, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Gobble, you agreed not to pursue RFA for one year here [5]. Trying to get someone to nominate you is a violation of the spirit if not the letter of that promise. You need to get it through your head: adminship is not a trophy and with the number of warnings you have gotten lately you have zero chance of attaining it anytime in the next six months to a year anyway. Given your appalling lack of good judgement I have revoked your reviewer and rollback permissions. You are headed away from adminship, not towards it, with the course you are plotting for yourself. The community is a little more tolerant of incompetence when it comes from such a young person, but there comes a point when a user is doing more harm than good and needs to be shown the door. Wise up and actually listen to all the good advice that has been given to you on this page or you will find yourself at that point in the near future. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:52, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

I agree with the above easily. You have agreed to back off from RFA for a year. Even if you did not, I would still not nominate you because I know after those 4 RFA's the community would quickly close the RFA with a case of WP:NOTNOW (again). Think about it this way, you are once again a new user trying to help out on Wikipedia. Would you go around tagging articlesfor CSD this recently? Would you run for adminship that recently. The obvious answers are no and no. For now read through WP:CSD and User:SoWhy/Ten Commandments for Speedy Deletion THOROUGHLY. I'm sure others have tried this method but I see no other way forward until you know the criteria inside out. Other articles to read include User:SoWhy/Common A7 mistakes, Wikipedia:Field guide to proper speedy deletion and Wikipedia:Concerns about Speedy Deleters. As for RFA, Beeblebrox is right, for the next year you need to concentrate on getting taggings right, stop bothering other for nominations and demonstrate you understand the core policies and that WP:Adminship is not a trophy. I have agreed to adopt and I will, but remember what frank has stated above, "adoption is much more about you as the person being adopted than it is about the adopter. You must display a willingness to accept input from others and act on it." Derild4921☼ 19:45, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Your Wikipedia career

I want to add more to the discussions above, since you continue to seem focused on adminship. What's said above is true: you are moving further away from it with each phase of your time here. Asking someone to nominate you shows an appalling lack of knowledge of how Wikipedia works. In addition, you seem to think the only thing between you and adminship is that you've tagged articles at CSD incorrectly. Nothing can be further from the truth; that is simply one item on the list:

• You aren't reviewing new articles correctly (see above)
• You're not participating in very many community-related items such as AIV and AFD
• Your participation in WP:AIV is hit-or-miss; plenty of your AIV reports in the last two months were declined
• Your CSD tagging problems are documented in your talk archives
• You don't appear to know how to check user contribution histories or article histories
• You have only a passing knowledge of what a diff is or how to properly link one
• You have a major case of WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT
• You also have a pretty scorching case of WP:EDITCOUNTITIS
• You make edits without really checking what's going on, for example this one from just 30 minutes ago, with the edit summary "removed name" (on Fulham Academy). Perhaps you thought that removing the name Wayne Brown from that article was useful because it pointed to a disambiguation page, or perhaps because the likely Wayne Brown being referred to (Wayne Brown (midfielder) no longer plays for Fulham. If it's the former, you should have linked to the correct one. If it's the latter, you could have moved his name to the "now playing elsewhere" section of the article.

In short, it seems like every one of your choices regarding how to act around here is the exact opposite of what the community expects from its contributors. Until you get those things right, there's no point in discussing advanced privileges. You asked me recently if I think you're doing well for a 12-year-old. The short, direct answer is "no". I have nothing against 12-year-olds (I've raised several myself :-) ) but you're not distinguishing yourself by your behavior, regardless of age. Put it this way: if you were an adult, and didn't have the obvious problem of being only a kid (sorry if that sounds condescending), you would likely have already been blocked, possibly indefinitely. The fact that you claim to be 12 is granting you some additional leeway (also noted above) but that won't last forever either.

Right now, what's going on is you are bringing attention to yourself in a negative way. You have at least three editors that I have seen on your talk page recently who appear to be going through every one of your contributions with a fine-toothed comb to see if you're making mistakes. That is not the kind of attention you want or need, and it is likely to shorten your time around here if it doesn't stop soon.  Frank  |  talk  20:34, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Gobbleswoggler has once made himself 'famous' by doing a couple of failed RfAs. Since then he has been a helpdesk 'regular'. He has often asked whether he has done something wrong (though he usually does something wrong before asking). I think he is acting in good faith, only his mistakes in judgement has led to some misunderstanding. As long as he is more 'wiki-educated' I believe he can become a much better editor than he is now. BTW I'm 12 too. Kayau Voting IS evil 09:27, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism?

Why do you consider this vandalism? Have you read the book?  Frank  |  talk  20:54, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

I thought it was because it had the word bitch in it and I didn't know it said that in the book.Gobbleswoggler (talk) 20:56, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

I don't know if it says that in the book or not. But if you read the entire section it appears in, it doesn't seem so unreasonable given that she apparently killed Bellatrix in that fight. Whether or not the edit belongs in the article is another question, but it isn't vandalism and shouldn't be marked as such.  Frank  |  talk  21:03, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

For clarification, it is in the book and that is an example of when to use Undo instead of marking it as vandalism. Derild4921☼ 22:02, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

More importantly, a swear word does not mean vandalism, part of the AGF guideline. Thanks Tommy! [message] 22:34, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

And on another point, not everything that breaks the rules is "vandalism" - vandalism is only when something is done in bad faith. I know it can be hard to tell sometimes, and I've got it wrong a few times myself, but it really is essential to assume good faith and not throw vandalism accusations at every edit that isn't perfect. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:39, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Another "vandalism" problem

You just gave an IP a final warning (having only given them a level 2 previously) for this. Firstly, it's debatable whether it's vandalism at all (the editor may just be incorrect, but honest in their opinion). But even if it is vandalism, it's nowhere near a sufficiently egregious offence to bypass the standard 1-4 levels of warnings. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:20, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

I think I'll adopt you.

I believe you're better off with a fellow 12-year-old as an adopter than a grown-up who cannot tolerate kids acting in a silly way. So I decided to send an adopt offer. Kayau Voting IS evil 09:38, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Well, Kayau, if you look on my talk page and on the thread above called Adoption? you'll you that I've agreed to adopt Gobbleswoggler. Now it's just up to him/her to decide who to have as an adopter. Derild4921☼ 12:20, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Which is wrong, because many people can have two adopters at the same time. For example, User:Mono and I have a common adoptee. Kayau Voting IS evil 12:37, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Wow, really? I did not know that... So if Gobbleswoggler agrees should we do the same thing and share an adoptee? Derild4921☼ 12:39, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi folks, I think it's very good of both of you to offer adoption - and I think if you're careful, you could be quite complementary to each other. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:46, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm reminded of the "ancient proverb": Man with one watch is always sure what time it is. Man with two watches is never sure.  Frank  |  talk  14:46, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Well, I'm pretty sure we're smarter than watches and if we give out conflicting advice we can also ask for a third opinion. Derild4921☼ 14:56, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Not the point; the last thing Gobbleswoggler needs is a discussion about which instruction is correct. GS needs clear, concise, easy-to-understand (and implement!) guidance at all times. Ambiguity of any sort will make things worse.  Frank  |  talk  14:59, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Well, you're right and I suppose the only way forward would be for Gobbleswoggler to choose his adopter. Unless you have something else in mind? Derild4921☼ 15:04, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

On second thought, yes, I think Frank is right. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:07, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Well, first order of business is for GS to agree to adoption. It's far from clear this will actually happen. Second is for GS to pick an adopter. After that, we'll see. I think it would be great for GS to spend time as an adoptee of one person, say a month or three, and then move to another adopter. Each could work on one or two specific areas of concern.  Frank  |  talk  15:12, 2 August

Hmm... that seems that a great idea! Now let's just wai and see what GS agrees to then. Derild4921☼ 15:28, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

New Page Patrol isn't easy - not even for an old sod like me

One of the problems with New Page Patrol is that there are undoubtedly a bunch of kids that think it's a game. On the other hand, there's a bunch of kids who try very hard to take things seriously, but either they lack the confidence or the knowledge to get it right. I think Gobbleswoggler is in the second group. I helped him a lot a while back, but I do think he needs to concentrate more on the stuff he knows more about, such as footy, and leave the page patrolling up to others who have a bit more experience and sound judgement. There is always a danger that one day he might tread on the wrong toes and get himself blocked forever. Let's not forget that this is after all an encyclopedia, and there's an even bigger bunch of top knobs, Lords, Ladies, famous people, and one heck of a load of university professors who write stuff on here. I'm one of of those grumpy old professor sods, but I have had Gobbles on my watch list for a long time, and like to think I can jump in with a bit of help and advice when he needs it. Like now. And if anyone else needs any help before they step in the caca, they are welcome to come and sit in my talk page, grab a coke or a coffee, and have a natter. - but I'd love to see all these 12 & 13 year olds taking on some responsibility, and helping each other. None of you is going to make it to adminship yet - hmm.. they probably wouldn't even let me be one, but one of the days guys, you're going to have a couple of those shiny little Good Article icons on your page, and that's worth more than a million unreflected drive-by taggings!--Kudpung (talk) 14:40, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Hey thanks for the great lecture Kudpung! ;) Derild4921☼ 14:46, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Kudpung, I thought s** refers to a difficulty, not a person doing it. :P Thanks for the advice: it applies for me too. :) When I do NPP nowadays I only CSD blatant vandalism or copyright violation, because I'm too scared to risk another mistake. Everything else goes to AfD, which is not a pain in the neck because it's automated with Kissle. :D Kayau Voting IS evil 15:12, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Adopting

Ok, GS(Gobbleswoggler) has agreed for me to adopt him as shown on my talk page. I'll be glad for everyone to have some input if I have not adressed something appropriately. Now, GS, what questions and concerns do you have that you would like to have answered and addressed? After that I will first direct you along article building and then slowly edge you towards some of the behind the scenes work which you are having major troubles in. Before that, please do not try and tag any articles or fight any vandalism unless the vandalism is plain and clear like if someone goes on a biography page and types "I HATE THIS PERSON" etc.. Ok? Derild4921☼ 16:47, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Ok,first of all;how do you edit and stylize your signiture?,Gobbleswoggler (talk) 16:50, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Lol, unexpected question. To change your sig around go to "my preferences" on the top righish area. Under the user profile go down to the signature section and enter the code for your sig. Then check the "Treat the above as wiki markup." box. Now, I can't explain how to change the color and add cool designs, so just visit this page! Make sure to remember the don't of signatures. Good luck! If you have any troubles just respond here. Derild4921☼ 16:54, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Good job but be careful with STiki as not everything is neccassarily vandalism. Now, it seems that you also like association football! Me too! So why not find a stub and get it to start class for now? A list of stubs can be found here. Derild4921☼ 14:34, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Also, I don't know if you've seen the discussion yet, but Kayua has informed me the creator of Stiki has been blocked indefinitely so it will go out of date soon. Try this instead. And in response to your question, find a stub you are interested with the link I provided and bring it up to a start class. Look here for the difference between stub and start. Derild4921☼ 14:50, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

A "start" class is one class above a stub. A stub is very short with little or no refs. A start has a one or two section with a few sentences each that are cited. stub and a start. As for the anti vandal tool, just put

importScript('User:Lupin/recent2.js');

into your monobook or vector page depending on which skin you use. To check, go to My preferences/appearance/skin and check which skin you're using. Derild4921☼ 15:03, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Hmm...are you useing internet exploerer cause it might mot work with that. Also, trying taking the code off User:Gobbleswoggler/vector.css and the adding it in User:Gobbleswoggler/vector.js after deleting "You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license. See the Terms of Use for details. Edit summary (Briefly describe the changes you have made) ". Then follow the instructions on the top of the page to bypass you cache. Derild4921☼ 15:14, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Re: STiki - see User talk:West.andrew.g#Hello. That doesn't look like he's been kicked out, just temporarily blocked for a technical reason with a request to contact ArbCom. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:16, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Did you bypass your cache yet? Derild4921☼ 15:30, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Well, if it still doesn't work then the only thing is that it might not work with Chrome. You can try it with your monobook skin instead. I've used the tool once with Firefox and monobook and it was fine for me. Derild4921☼ 15:41, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

So far

So far good job on vandalism remember to please be careful. If you can't tell if something is vandlism or a good-faith edit written badly, just undo it and don't apply a warning. Also, for edits like this and this it is better to warn using these since it removed content and didn't add vandalism. Derild4921☼ 15:58, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Another thing, I see that you have started to fix typos as well. Try to fix the typos that are within articles. Some users don'e like people editing their userpage without permission and it won't make a difference if a word is spelled wrong in an AFD as long as everyone knows what it means. Derild4921☼ 16:13, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Can you provide the links to the RFAs? Derild4921☼ 16:22, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

To change the title, just go to the page you want to change, click on move and paste

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/gobbleswoggler 3

into the move box. Derild4921☼ 16:40, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Can I just say that I think changing other people's spelling anywhere other than in article space is a definite no-no! People will feel they're being policed if you change their Talk page or RfA etc spellings, and you should generally never change a User page at all (unless to do something like revert blatant vandalism or personal attacks). Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:45, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Per Frank here Gobbles, would you mind keeping conversations and questions here to have it in one place? I have this watchlisted so don't use talkback templates either. Thanks! Derild4921☼ 16:56, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Seriously please try to listen to the advice from Boing!. It's only a matter of time before edits like this [6] get someone angry with you.--Cube lurker (talk) 17:02, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Oh, and just one more suggestion (well two) - 1) before you head off in yet another direction, check with your mentor first and ask whether you should be doing it and how to go about it, and 2) Really, really, keep discussions in one place - there are other people wishing you well and keeping a friendly eye on your progress, and in general it can seriously annoy people if you try to carry on one single conversation over two different Talk pages. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:09, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

RfAs (again)

I suppose I should be pleased that you are going back and looking over your previous RfAs, as has been suggested. This bit about renaming them was probably unnecessary but since you were given advice to do so, I've stepped in and done it. First of all, the two pages you thought had the same name did not (they can't). One had your username capitalized, and one did not. They were different page names. Second, when you made the move, you chose the wrong one to move because that put them out of order. I have taken care of it; here is a list of all of them, in order:

• Requests for adminship/Gobbleswoggler
• Requests for adminship/Gobbleswoggler 2
• Requests for adminship/Gobbleswoggler 3
• Requests for adminship/Gobbleswoggler 4

In addition, I updated the lists at Wikipedia:Unsuccessful adminship candidacies (Chronological) and Wikipedia:Unsuccessful adminship candidacies/G so the links are correct.  Frank  |  talk  17:38, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

I think the order is still wrong, and Gobbleswoggler 3 is the second one - it was started on Feb 12 (the day after the first one), but the closing admin comment wasn't until June (commented "Note that this is several months after the last !vote"). Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:01, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Grrr, you're right. But going by the closing date, it's correct; which way do you think we should let it settle?  Frank  |  talk  18:04, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

I think it should go by the starting date, as that's the way they would normally be numbered - I'd offer to help, but not being able to move without redirects lets me off the hook ;-) Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:44, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

OK, I've switched them. No idea what to do with the chronological list though. I guess a note at the bottom. Go for it :-)  Frank  |  talk  18:52, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

I'll have a think in the morning - I'm losing the will to live right now ;-) Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 22:15, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Smelling pistake

Careful, you just changed links to a user page to a a red link [7]. Nev1 (talk) 20:53, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

For crying out loud!

Will you LISTEN to what people are saying to you - and STOP changing other people's spelling in user and talk pages! Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:55, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Disruption

Gobbles, you've done it again. This recent edit ("Correcting spelling: alltime->all-time") was NOT a spelling error. You changed a word in a URL from http://boxofficemojo.com/alltime/world/ to http://boxofficemojo.com/all-time/world/. Please click the those two links and see what your "spelling correction" did. And please start listening to all the advice you're being given. You have now crossed the line into WP:DISRUPTION. The next step will be for you to be blocked for it.  Frank  |  talk  21:41, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Another error

This "correction" created a redirect. Vermillion, South Dakota is a real place; despite the fact that the color is spelled vermilion, the place is not.  Frank  |  talk  21:51, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Enough was enough a long time ago

And now you are blocked for six months for gross incompetence. You do not seem to have the abilities needed to edit in an environment like this, and no amount of advice or guidance seems to help. Perhaps in six months you will have gained some perspective and maturity. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|Your reason here}}, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:50, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Gobbles block

Sigh. Gobbles is yet to get used to how we work here. However, I believe that his latest clowning around was due to not checking the 'ignore pages outside the article namespace' box in AVT. When I told Derild he should use AVT I mean the filter recent changes feature, not the spellcheck... sigh. He probably thinks the tool is a person who can live an think. I just hope he is more mature when the block expires, and that his block may be shortened where possible. Kayau Voting IS evil 05:41, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

If and when he's back, I'd suggest he use no automated tools whatsoever, as he seems to be incapable of applying any judgment to what they tell him. He needs to learn how to do actual grunt work the slow way, using his brain. So if he wants to do anti-vandal work, for example, he should use only the recent changes page, and check them manually. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:27, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

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

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

---

Request reason:

I didn't mean to cause any disruption.I'll be the first to admit that i have made some terrible mistakes.I didn't realising i was breaking links and correcting user names.I'll admit i should have been more careful.I was really upset when I found out I was blocked.I understand why I have been blocked but i think 6 months is far too long.As you can probably tell,i was really good at updating footballers goals and appearances.But being as it hasn't being the football season as of lately,I have being trying different things.The football season starts this Saturday and that is what I would do for the next year.Without being able to edit,the summer holidays will be boring for me as i am 12.Once again sorry for any inconvenience and if i had my account unblocked,i would be extra careful.

Decline reason:

Your intent isn't in question. Your competence is -- and you've demonstrated a lack. Six months is a long time when you're 12; perhaps by 2011, you'll have gained sufficient maturity to work with the Wikipedia community rather than against it. PS: We don't care if you're bored. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 14:58, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

I can't do anything about the block myself, but here's a comment - I don't think you have yet grasped the main thing you are doing wrong. It's not specific mistakes, like the spelling corrections. I think there's one big overall mistake that you keep repeating, and if I were an admin considering an unblock, I'd need to feel that you had properly understood what it was and were committed to rectifying it. So, can you work out what I'm talking about? Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:46, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Is it also because of my repetitive asking to be an administrator or reverting vandalism and warning the user when it was just a good faith edit not vandalism.And because it am tagging pages using the wrong criteria?Gobbles (talk) 08:50, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Exactly: not once or twice, but because you wouldn't stop after being warned and make even more mistakes. Kayau Voting IS evil 09:01, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

As I said, it's not specific mistakes that I'm thinking of. But Kayau is on to it - your big and repeated mistake is NOT LISTENING! And that's the over-arching problem that dwarfs any of the specifics. You were told about your bad taggings, yet you ignored us and carried on. You were told about dropping your admin obsession, yet you ignored us and carried on. You were warned about your bad vandalism warnings, yet you ignored us and carried on. You were warned about your bad spelling corrections, yet you ignored us and carried on. You don't listen until you are physically stopped, and even then you don't really listen - you only start begging and pretending you'll change. Anyway, it's not up to me to re-evaluate your block, or to set conditions for lifting it - I just hope these words will help. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:12, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

• I'm not going to 'officially' review the unblock request above, but personally I think that a few months break will do you good. I am indeed worried by the way many users point out your almost obsessed with Wikipedia, and the fact you have described it as your life, and only source of amusement during the summer holidays, is a bit worrying. I would assume this could be the reason you have gotten into trouble, as your enthusiasm may have made your mind over-ride the warnings you were getting to the point your editing became disruptive. (I know of other editors who had the same general issue.) I would suggest you take this time away and find some other hobbies to enjoy, then by the time your block expires you may be able to put editing Wikipedia into perspective and take it alot slower, and thus avoid mistakes. I hope you enjoy the remainder of your summer holiday, and the upcoming football season. As a summary: Take the time to reflect on why you were blocked, and to adopt a calmer approach to Wikipedia editing, then when you return in a few months you should be able to avoid the same mistakes. --Taelus (Talk) 09:08, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

• Note to reviewing admin - I'm an involved admin so I'm not touching this one, but I will comment: I think any consideration of an unblock should require that Gobbles avoid the use of any automated tool or user right whatsoever. I'm thinking in particular of AVT, Twinkle, and Rollback, but those are not meant to be an all-inclusive list. I mean any. This opinion applies whether an unblock is considered now, a few months, or 5 months and 29 days. Gobbles' biggest problem - as noted above - is lack of demonstrated ability to listen to any advice. If allowed to return to editing, Gobbles should be kept on a short leash. In addition, the note above about "I'll be extra careful" is not the first (or even third) time we've heard this; diffs available on request.  Frank  |  talk  12:29, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
  • WP:RESTRICTIONS? Kayau Voting IS evil 12:38, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

I know that page isn't only for cases involving ArbCom, but still, I don't think we need to get ArbCom involved and we don't need to make it complicated.  Frank  |  talk  12:42, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Ugghh just came back on and did not except something like this to happen. Gobbles, we know you're trying to get better but that's just clearly not enough. When I said work on football stubs I felt that was the best way to start; on something easy and mistakes could be quickly changed. If you come back after the 6 month block come to my talk page again and listen to advice this time. Derild4921☼ 12:44, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

If I am unblocked,i would like to keep the live spellcheck and twinkle but i am happy to be restricted.Gobbles (talk) 12:47, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

<edit conflict with gobbles>I apologise if this comment sounds really, really stupid, but if such conditions are imposed on his unblock, would it be possible that his huggle.css, vector.js, and vector.css be deleted, and all his skin.jses and skin.csses be fully protected from creation? Kayau Voting IS evil 12:49, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Well, just as a comment, Twinke would still be able to be allowed through preferences. Unless there's someway through that? Derild4921☼ 12:55, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Hm, there appears to be one. Kayau Voting IS evil 12:57, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

(ec) No, I really don't think you should keep Twinkle, as you have repeatedly misused it and you haven't really shown any willingness to learn how to use it properly. And I don't mean your multiple promises to be careful - I mean your unwillingness to stop what you're doing wrong when told, and your unwillingness to follow your mentor's directions. I seriously think you need a spell of only being able to do things manually, which is the best way to gain the quality experience that you need - you should forget vandal-fighting, or anything related to changing other editors' work, and just do manual content work of your own on football articles. As your mentor suggested (but which, alas, again you ignored) I think you would learn a lot by finding and expanding stub articles - and if you set that as a goal for yourself for, say, your next 6 months of work, I think you'd improve your chances of an early unblock. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:02, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Editing stubs sounds interesting.If I was to be unblocked i think i would give that a go.But mainly,as the football season starts this saturday,I would be focusing all the time on updating the footballers appearances and goals.Gobbles (talk) 13:06, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

It's great you find interest in it now, but isn't it a bit late? Derild4921☼ 13:10, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

<edit conflict>If you get unblocked, I'd advise you to remove the last sentence of your userpage, as well as the one about aiming for awards. Kayau Voting IS evil 13:11, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

I'll do it now.Gobbles (talk) 13:12, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Oh,i can't.Gobbles (talk) 13:13, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

That's because your block does not allow that; I can do it for you. I also strongly advise you to insert a space after punctuation, especially since you are planning to expand stubs. Like this: 'I love apples. I love oranges, too.' rather than: 'I love apples.I love oranges,too.' Kayau Voting IS evil 13:14, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Will do. I have been quite bored since i was blocked. I support Ipswich Town F.C. and the players' stats don't get updated often as there aren't many ipswich fans on wikipedia. Gobbles (talk) 13:18, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

I have seen alot of vandalism today but can do nothing about it.If i am unblocked i will be extremely careful.Gobbles (talk) 14:03, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

And even after all this, you haven't taken in anything, have you? You are NOT going to be allowed to go back to what you were doing, no matter how many times you promise to be careful. So just leave vandalism to the rest of us (the thousands of other editors will get by just fine without you) and try to convince us that you have listened to what we have been telling you! Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:55, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

I realise that I may not have been listening to other users all the time.When i was using the live spellcheck,some of the time I didn't realise that I was editing someones user page or talk page.Gobbles (talk) 19:06, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Can I at least have my ban reduced?,Gobbles (talk) 19:21, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Look Gobbles, the admin's decision is final. When I think of all the silly applications you made to be an admin yourself and wouldn't stop, and in spite of all my friendly warnings that you were heading fast for a block, you haven't taken a blind bit of notice of what I and everyone else has been telling you. If you start asking now for your well deserved long block to be shortened, you might end up having it extended, or even being blocked indefinitely for the cheek of wasting everyone's time. Take a final tip, and give Wikipedia a miss for a while and find something else to do during the school holidays. Get yourself a fee blog page from Google and write your own blog or something. You could call it Advice for Kids How Not to Get Blocked on Wikipedia.--Kudpung (talk) 19:35, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

(ec) I can't reduce your block, and to be honest, I don't think it would be right to so so even if I could. I've now looked back over your whole Talk page archives, and I just don't see sufficient competence or maturity for you to be a Wikipedia editor right now - I just see lots of repeated warning for the same things, even repeated warnings for making the same mistakes with football stats, over and over again, and that you are either not listening to people or not capable of learning. Wikipedia needs a bit of maturity - especially the maturity to understand what you are and are not capable of doing properly. Maturity is not the same as age - we have a 13 year old here who possesses maturity well in advance of their years, but you do not possess the same maturity yet (and that's not an insult - by definition, the average 12 year old has the maturity of a 12 year old). The block is not a punishment, and its length should not be about what things you promise to do or how you promise to change. The block is there for your own good as well as Wikipedia's, and I think what you most need now is time - actual time to actually grow a bit older, and a bit more mature with it. You can develop a lot in six months, so I'd urge you to spend the time away from Wikipedia and enjoy some of your young life doing young things. And when you come back, I'll be happy to help you get restarted (assuming I'm still here, of course, and providing you do actually show the extra bit of maturity that is needed). Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:59, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Ok.For the next six months,i am going to read the pages about tagging pages,speedy deletion,twinkle,disruptive editing etc.I will definitely better in six months.I would just like to take this time though to say thank-you to all the administrators and other users for the information you have given me.I will also read my archived talk pages over and over.Best regards.Gobbleswoggler (talk) 16:24, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

And, erm, don't forget to go off and do some stuff that's not Wikipedia too, eh? ;-) Happy summer hols -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:27, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Just out of interest BsZ. On a comment by kayau,it says that he hopes i will be more mature when i come back and my ban being shortened where possible. What does he mean by the latter half?Gobbleswoggler (talk) 16:31, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

I presume he was just hoping the block could be shortened, but the consensus appears to be against that. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:35, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, that is what I meant. Kayau Voting IS evil 10:41, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

What are the chances it will be shortened? Gobbleswoggler (talk) 13:58, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Gobbles, as we have said, an admin's decision is final. It is now near impossible for the block to be shortened.Derild4921☼ 14:02, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Look, Gobbles, I mean this in the friendliest possible way, but just stop badgering us, switch off, and go away for a while! Go straight to Real Life, do not pass Go, do not enter "http://en.wikipedia.org" into your browser. (I, for one, will not talk to you further until after your block is lifted). -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:09, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

received your email

I have absolutely no intention of reducing your block, and the idea that you received no warning that you were doing anything wrong is laughable in the extreme. You are not blocked from editing this talk page, if you want to appeal the block you can post another unblock request and another administrator will review your reasoning. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:44, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Unbelievable! -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:57, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

In the interest of fairness, I don't necessarily check my WP email account every day, he sent the message on Wednesday but I didn't see it till this morning. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:24, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Ah, OK. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:47, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

What Gobbles doesn't realise is that if he persists, an angry admin might even block him from editing his talk page too!--Kudpung (talk) 08:47, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

An admin who acts in that fashion out of anger ought not to be an admin. If there's disruption going on, that's one thing, but to take away talk page access out of anger is another. I'm not saying there won't be a reason to take away talk page access - I can see that coming as a possible outcome here - but I just don't like the perception that admins do things around here because they're angry. We should - not saying all of us do, nor all of the time, but we should - be acting in the best interests of the encyclopedia and the community that supports it.  Frank  |  talk  20:05, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Received yet another email

And the answer is still the same as the above. If for some reason you don't want to use the normal unblock request process you can email WP:BASC. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:31, 2 January 2011 (UTC)