User talk:RebeccaTheMegaAwesome

Welcome!

Hello, RebeccaTheMegaAwesome, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! — cocomonkilla | talk | contrib 23:50, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is amazing!

Thanks for welcoming me here! I love being a Wikipedian! RebeccaTheMegaAwesome (talk) 00:28, 28 May 2015 (UTC)RebeccaTheMegaAwesome[reply]

May 2015

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates, as you did with Mishela Rapo. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. Thank you. Joseph2302 (talk) 00:30, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

RebeccaTheMegaAwesome, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi RebeccaTheMegaAwesome! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Technical 13 (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 17:31, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

May 2015

You are suspected of sock puppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the notes for the suspect, then respond to the evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/RebeccaTheAwesomeXD. Thank you. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 19:43, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. CT Cooper · talk 21:35, 29 May 2015 (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).

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

Request reason:

Please unblock me! RebeccaTheMegaAwesome (talk) 23:50, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you

understand what you have been blocked for,
will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Huon (talk) 00:02, 30 May 2015 (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.

That is never going to happen, Rebecca. You created a sock-puppet account, because your other one RebeccaTheAwesomeXD is currently blocked. That is a very bad thing to do. As a result you are now blocked forever. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 23:56, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note to admins. The user had made their unblock request as a simple new topic thread rather than using the {{unblock}} template. I have acted in good faith, and moved their request into that said template so that their request doesn't become ignored. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 00:01, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Apology

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).

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

Request reason:

I'm sorry, Wikipedia.

Decline reason:

Under the circumstances a standard offer approach could be taken in this case. PhilKnight (talk) 21:04, 31 May 2015 (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.

I'm sorry, Wes. I'm sorry, Huon. I'm sorry, CT. I'm new to wikipedia, and I really want someone to recreate "Mishela Rapo". And I'm very sorry for sock-puppetry. At first, I didn't know what sock-puppetry was. I'm only saying this because have to - I hope that around June 21, 2015, you'll think of a good day for my block to expire, and that someone will recreate "Mishela Rapo". Once again, I'm sorry. Can you forgive me, Wikipedia? Please? RebeccaTheMegaAwesome (talk) 19:06, 31 May 2015 (UTC)RebeccaTheMegaAwesome[reply]

Note to admins: Rebecca is clearly not new to Wikipedia; after a recent admission by herself, in which it was revealed that what was originally thought to be the sock-master, RebeccaTheAwesomeXD (talk · contribs), was actually a sock-puppet of her original account Red Plastic 12000 (talk · contribs). Red Plastic joined Wikipedia on 2 June 2013, and was indefinitely blocked on 9 August 2013, with talk page access revoked a day later. She then evaded that block by creating the first of 2 socks (RebeccaTheAwesomeXD (talk · contribs)) on 18 December 2013. That account was subsequently placed on WP:NEWBLPBAN sanctions for repetitive adding of unsourced and original content at BLP articles; and then further blocked indefinitely due to her creation of a second sock (this account) on 27 May 2015. It should also be noted that Rebecca has asked on her first sock account to have her multiple accounts deleted. Why, I do not know, but most likely to dodge indef blocks and "disruptively edit" under a new pseudonym. Looking at the edits of 98.225.189.19 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) which ironically follow on from the same edits that Red Plastic 12000 (talk · contribs) shortly after their block, and ended immediately at the same time that RebeccaTheAwesomeXD (talk · contribs) was created, I would come to a slight conclusion that the IP belongs to the same user, and thus evaded blocking sanctions in 2013. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 19:40, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Listen, Wes - I'm sorry. Can you forgive me? RebeccaTheMegaAwesome (talk) 20:11, 31 May 2015 (UTC)RebeccaTheMegaAwesome[reply]

I can't even trust you now, never mind forgive you. Rebecca, you have deceived and lied to so many people who put a lot of trust in you. Everyone thought that your account RebeccaTheAwesomeXD was new, but then you revealed yesterday that Red Plastic 12000 was in fact your first account, so you purposely and knowingly created a new account in order to evade the block imposed. And it was only yesterday that you pestered admins twice at RebeccaTheAwesomeXD to unlock you, and in the second request you stated that you were "very angry". You also asked for all 3 accounts to be "deleted". Why? So that you can start all over again creating multiple accounts? Doing that only gets you blocked again for socking again. So I am sorry, but I cannot trust you any more. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 20:19, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have an idea! I can make up a song that can easily force you to change your mind! Okay, here it goes. IIIII need to know now, know now, can you trust me again? IIIII need to know now, know now, can you trust me again? That was sung to the tune of John Newman's "Love Me Again".

Singing me songs is not going to make me change my mind. Rebecca, you need to learn and understand that you have done very bad things, and have been warned so many times in the last 2 years about them. Now please, do what the admin said above and read standard offer, and decide from there what you need to do next. But continued requests for being unblocked and pestering people will not get anyone to change their mind, and you will only end up having your talk page access revoked too - which means you won't be able to post anything on your own talk page(s). Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 00:00, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm also going with the standard offer. I would want to see at least six months of no socks or other trouble from you before I would consider an unblocking. CT Cooper · talk 20:06, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- That's a great idea!! RebeccaTheMegaAwesome (talk) 13:41, 3 June 2015 (UTC)RebeccaTheMegaAwesome[reply]

@RebeccaTheMegaAwesome: I don't even think a standard offer is even going to help you understand your wrong doings. You have been told that evading blocks by making sock accounts is a very bad thing. Yet you made a new sock account a mere day or two afterwards. You new account June The Mega Wonderful (talk · contribs) is clearly yours and that has now been blocked. You must STOP making new sock accounts for the next SIX months. That means you must now behave, stop socking, and wait until December 2015 before any admin will even agree to unblocking any of your accounts. I would also in the event a standard offer is accepted, that you agree to undergo an adoption proposal, and have a highly experienced Wikipedia to teach you the rules before you are allowed to edit ANY article whatsoever. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 13:49, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, Wes! I'll do everything I can to stop socking and wait till December to become unblocked! ;) RebeccaTheMegaAwesome (talk) 10:27, 2 July 2015 (UTC)RebeccaTheMegaeAwesome[reply]

Rebecca, that is very hard to believe. You socked only yesterday editing and removing a AfD template from Eliias, using your IP. It is time to be honest and stop with the lies, as you are only getting yourself deeper into trouble. That is how you lose friends in the real-world, with telling too many lies all the time. And you are blocked forever. The only reason December was mentioned, is because you have to prove to EVERYONE now that you can change, that you understand what you have done wrong, and everything else covered in the standard offer agreement. And only then would admins consider your appeal, but it doesn't mean they would unblock you. However, if they did, then I would suggest that you would undergo tutoring on Wikipedia by means of the WikiAdoption process. Have an experienced editor teach you the rules, and only if they feel satisfied, that you would be allowed to edit ANY article again. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 10:46, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Wes. I'll do everything I can to stop causing trouble. RebeccaTheMegaAwesome (talk) 12:30, 2 July 2015 (UTC)RebeccaTheMegaAwesome[reply]