User talk:Swatchdog

Welcome![edit]

Hi Swatchdog! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! --evrik ^(talk) 14:19, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

July 2020[edit]

Hello, I'm CommanderWaterford. I noticed that you recently removed content from Statue of Robert Baden-Powell, London without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. CommanderWaterford (talk) 14:25, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Are you fucking joking? Did you look at the talk page? Swatchdog (talk) 14:27, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Civility[edit]

Your comments at User talk:Evrik#Let's try something were a bit passive aggressive. You are absolutely correct about the copyvios, and we also agree about the statue dispute earlier, but please keep WP:CIVIL in mind. If you disagree with an edit, take it to the article talk page and keep your cool. Focus on the content, not the editor. ◢   Ganbaruby!   (Say hi!) 08:49, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think they were passive aggressive but I take your point. I was giving him a chance to show me what kind of editor he was. He showed me. I will try to avoid him where possible. Swatchdog (talk) 18:15, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived[edit]

Hi Swatchdog! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Conflict with another editor, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread.

The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:00, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

December 2020[edit]

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

ST47 (talk) 20:06, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

Request reason:

I am most definitely not a sockpuppet of Spoonkymonkey, although I understand the confusion. I don't believe I have done anything at all that violates Wikipedia guidelines or policies. I believe I have been blocked because of where I am editing from, not anything I have said or done. If I have done anything disruptive, please let me know and I will of course immediately stop. If unblocked I promise to abide by Wikipedia rules and guidelines. Thank you. Swatchdog (talk) 21:37, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Checkuser verified abuser of multiple accounts. Unambiguous. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇} 01:36, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

Question for Tenebrae[edit]

@Tenebrae: You didn't answer my question on ANI. You should probably bear in mind this prior incident and this comment. I know they were both some time ago, but I think you have a good memory. Swatchdog (talk) 21:42, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@KyleJoan: see abive. Just FYI. Swatchdog (talk) 21:44, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]