User talk:24.198.139.17

Warning

If you keep disrupting WP:ANI discussions, as you are doing at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Magnolia677:_Inappropriate_actions, you will be blocked. Please don't WP:BLUDGEON and please don't cast WP:ASPERSIONS. Thanks. –Novem Linguae (talk) 01:57, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

How did I disrupt anything? I !voted and then responded to people attempting to discredit me. Please show me exactly where I cast a single aspersion. I didn't cast any. Instead, I was the victim of multiple aspersions being cast against me. 24.198.139.17 (talk) 02:07, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

You created a huge back and forth in that ANI thread without presenting any evidence. I had to collapse it because it was disruptive. I'd recommend not editing that thread anymore. If you continue to be disruptive, I will block you for disruptive editing, WP:NOTHERE (all of your edits are to a dramaboard, no edits to article space), and WP:SOCK (you are likely a logged out editor or banned editor evading scrutiny). Thanks. –Novem Linguae (talk) 02:09, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Calling me a SOCK is an aspersion and also bad faith. As such, you are the one being disruptive and violating policy. Feel free to file a report at SPI. 24.198.139.17 (talk) 02:11, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Ok I will. Insanityclown1 (talk) 02:18, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

@Insanityclown1. SPI can't be used on IPs. For privacy reasons, checkusers do not want to connect IPs to usernames publicly. –Novem Linguae (talk) 02:19, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

I hereby revoke any expectation of privacy and grant anyone with checkuser permissions permission to see if I am sock puppet. If they find evidence (which they won't), then they are welcome to block this IP without publicly linking it to a username. 24.198.139.17 (talk) 02:22, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Stop trying to move comments into the hat, that's not up to you. MrOllie (talk) 02:22, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

The comment that I moved is what started the discussion that others determined was too long. It should be moved too. 24.198.139.17 (talk) 02:24, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

that wasn't why it was hatted. Insanityclown1 (talk) 02:25, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Why am i not allowed to answer a question directed to me? 24.198.139.17 (talk) 02:26, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

You were allowed to, and you did so by wasting everyone's time. Insanityclown1 (talk) 02:48, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

How were my responses any more of waste of time than yours or ChildrenWillListen? I see three editors getting railroaded by the community for the actions of someone else. I !voted as such. You didn't like my !vote and made a disruptive issue out of it rather than simply !voting the other way. 24.198.139.17 (talk) 24.198.139.17 (talk) 03:06, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Hat extraneous reply due to misunderstanding. 24.198.139.17 (talk) 02:41, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

I didn't remove any of your comments from the ANI. For now, I simply collapsed them. Once you started edit warring the collapsing, after receiving a warning (so you should have been on your best beahvior), I felt that was too disruptive so I blocked. –Novem Linguae (talk) 02:32, 21 July 2025 (UTC) Novem Linguae, sorry the question Why am i not allowed to answer a question directed to me? was directed to Insanityclown1 rather than you. I know what hatting is. I also know what edit warring is and didn't do it. 24.198.139.17 (talk) 02:35, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

July 2025

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for persistently making disruptive edits.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  –Novem Linguae (talk) 02:23, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

@Novem Linguae: You still haven't shown where I violated a single policy. Yet, you and others have violated several. 24.198.139.17 (talk) 02:25, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

I feel I explained sufficiently above, where I mentioned several blockable issues with your behavior. –Novem Linguae (talk) 02:28, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

No, you didn't. You falsely accused me being disruptive, bludgeoning, casting aspersions, being not here and socking without providing evidence. 24.198.139.17 (talk) 02:32, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

@Novem Linguae: By the way, this is exactly why I comment at WP:ANI as an anonymous user with a dynamic IP. Both normal editors and administrators see an anonymous user whose first edit is at WP:ANI and they both assume the worst and feel free to violate normal policies to discredit or silence the anonymous user. You can turn a blind eye to the actions of others and call my actions a violation of WP:NOTHERE or WP:POINT if it makes you feel better, but it still exposes serious biases and hypocrisy. If you think new and anonymous users shouldn't be commenting it ANI, you should get consensus to set the appropriate page protection level on WP:ANI indefinitely. If you think anonymous users shouldn't be allowed to edit Wikipedia at all, get consensus from the foundation to disable it. Otherwise, policy allows me to comment there anonymously and I will continue doing so once my block above expires (although most likely from a different IP address). 24.198.139.17 (talk) 03:00, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Comment by The Bushranger

Other IPs comment at ANI all the time without issue. At least one other IP has commented in the same discussion that got you blocked without issue. The issue is your conduct, and yours alone, regardless of your registered or unregistered status. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 03:58, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

The Bushranger What exactly (please quote me) was problematic with my conduct? I am genuinely trying to understand what, if anything, I did that was actually a problem. As I see it, I made an honest assessment of the situation and responded as politely as possible to people who were responding to me. I don't see that as problematic. 24.198.139.17 (talk) 04:04, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

...if you honestly believe that made an honest assessment of the situation and responded as politely as possible to people who were responding to me, that perfectly encapsulates the problem. Because you absolutely didn't assess the situation correctly, and your responses to being questioned about it were the opposite of polite. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 04:09, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Ok, you disagree with me. That's fine, but do you think I should be blocked for it? Please quote any response that was impolite. 24.198.139.17 (talk) 04:17, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Question for Liz

@Liz: I see that you blocked me for 31 hours for Block Evasion when I was already blocked for 31 hours by Novem Linguae for disruptive editing. May I ask why? I am not evading any active block that I am aware of. 24.198.139.17 (talk) 04:55, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Hat unhelpful reply from third party

Liz probably saw your suspicious behavior at ANI, then blocked you without realizing I had already blocked you. As mentioned above, your behavior (pre-block) is suspicious for socking (WP:LOUTSOCK). –Novem Linguae (talk) 03:15, 22 July 2025 (UTC) Novem Linguae I clearly wasn't asking you. You've already made it clear that you have no problem violating WP:AGF or casting WP:ASPERSIONS. That violates policy and by continuing to do so, you are harassing me. Please stop and do not post here again. 24.198.139.17 (talk) 11:11, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

Yes, it was a mistake. I didn't realize you were already blocked. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:02, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

@24.198.139.17 Looks like you are no longer blocked, FWIW _pbp 22:26, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:24.198.139.17 reported by User:Insanityclown1 (Result: ). Thank you. Insanityclown1 (talk) 23:43, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

Well, if everyone is assuming bad faith and I'm going to get blocked anyway, I might as well do something that actually deserves a block. 24.198.139.17 (talk) 02:19, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Seriously?

I've been called a sock a few times. But a sock of Bbb23? That's new. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 02:46, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

You're definitely a sock. Not 100% on Bbb33 yet, the timing is about perfect and you seem to be on a fairly zealous track to get an admin bit. Much easier than RRFA. 24.198.139.17 (talk) 02:50, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

If you check my talk page archives, you would see this has come up quite a few times, and no, I'm not a sock and I don't want to be an admin. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 02:52, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

I've read them and came to the opposite conclusion. People don't like what I say, but time will tell. 24.198.139.17 (talk) 02:55, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Here's a question, if I really wanted to deceive the community, would I have proposed an article for deletion as my first edit? I have been lurking here for some time and read some of the internal project stuff when I'm bored, and I thought I wanted to make a strong entrance. That, of course, turned out to be a horrible mistake, and I nearly went to make a clean start, but I realized if I did that, I would actually be a sockpuppet and I'd inevitably run into trouble later. So I'm sticking with this account. If I ever run for admin (which I don't want to), people are rightfully going to oppose based on my first few edits and my previous block, so it's not like I stand a chance anyway. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 03:03, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

We'll see. Your biggest tell are your wiki lawyering skills, which I must say are impressive, although way too much so for there to be any doubt about extensive prior experience. 24.198.139.17 (talk) 03:10, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Yes, I've read quite a few policies because they're humorous and are generally a fun read, but let me tell you, it took me a few minutes to actually cite a source for the first time. And I knew little to nothing about the MoS except from what I've observed reading existing articles. Watchlists are quite useful; I wish I could have used something like that while I didn't have an account. I also thought "rollback" was a useful tool to have but I realized that you can just use the Twinkle buttons and it should do the same thing as what WP:ROLLBACK advertises. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 03:21, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

I don't buy that for a second. You could have studied policy and past discussions extensively for years and you wouldn't be able to communicate the way that you do. No one would do that anyway. 24.198.139.17 (talk) 03:25, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

You're right, I've been snooping around in the Wikipedia namespace pages on and off since COVID hit. I always had some other projects to work on so I never bothered creating an account. I had a bout of free time a few months ago and thought I'd see how Wikipedia editing actually works. Also, I'm curious (you can choose not to answer this), how long have you been around? Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 03:30, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Also I think you're just being too cynical of everyone. Magnolia definitely doesn't deserve to get blocked, and every new user who seems experienced isn't a sockpuppet (though I admit a lot are) Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 03:32, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

I've been "trolling" without an account for over 20 years. A lot of the experienced editors behavior completely turned me off to the project long ago, especially the more abusive administrators and experienced editors. Magnolia677 is not as bad as many, but she is a bully and should be sanctioned for it. After all civility is supposedly a "Pillar" for whatever good that means. She is just a guilty as the others she was interacting with who are now in the process of getting blocked indefinitely. 24.198.139.17 (talk) 03:47, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

I thought you were the troll who creates "fake sockpuppet" accounts and head into ANI discussions to incriminate the participants, but I guess that's a different troll. I have never edited before so I personally haven't had any experienced editors be abusive towards me, but who knows, that might change. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 03:54, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

"Nice is different than good"

PS: you're right if you think some people treat unregistered editors as second-class citizens (Us vs them, etc.) but I think you can go on for far longer without being meaningfully sanctioned if you don't have an account. As for the civility policy, I bet people who have been around for a long time grow cynical of everyone and stop being nice. Just look at you putting a sockpuppet template on someone's talk page. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 04:01, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

If you had asked this in my talk page in a civil way, we could have had this exact same conversation and you wouldn't have been blocked for a week. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 04:04, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

I was already in for a block though and don't mind taking a week off. 24.198.139.17 (talk) 04:07, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Do you generally stick to the noticeboards? Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 04:10, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Yes, almost exclusively and only when I see unjust accusations or hypocritical discussion. As you can imagine, it doesn't take long to get a timeout. 24.198.139.17 (talk) 04:17, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

You make a fair point. If you repeatedly try to argue against clear consensus, you'd get sanctioned sooner or later. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 04:21, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Sometimes consensus is unfair, wrong or doesn't even exist. In that case, it should be opposed even if doing so is futile in the short term. The funny thing is that I usually just want to comment and move on, knowing that my comment is unlikely to have any meaningful impact. However, there is often someone who wants to try to silence me or unfairly cast me in a bad light. There is no reason for me to tolerate that since the worst that will happen is a block and it doesn't take long for the mob to gather round. Pretty much exactly what happened the other day. At least it is mildly entertaining even if utterly pathetic of most parties involved, myself absolutely included amongst those being the most pathetic. 24.198.139.17 (talk) 05:04, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Let's be fair though. The template was earned. 24.198.139.17 (talk) 04:05, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

No, because I'm not a sockpuppet, though I think you wouldn't believe me no matter what I try to say. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 04:07, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Yes, you will not be able to convince me of that. My sincere apologies if by some extremely thin margin you really aren't, but there is a better chance of a major blizzard in the Sahara. 24.198.139.17 (talk) 04:10, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

However, at least two instances of snowfall have been recorded in Sahara, in February 1979 and December 2016, both in the town of Ain Sefra. Who knows, it might. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 04:24, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Yes, and you may not be a sock, but neither one is a good thing to bet on and it will likely be a while before we know. 24.198.139.17 (talk) 05:08, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

@ChildrenWillListen You know damn well no new account starts by AfDing something. I get that you were clean-starting, but clean-starting with an AfD is a bad look. I didn't create any AfDs until long after the first article I created had BEEN AfDed.

And I do agree with 24... that Magnolia has a get-along-with-people problem. I'm also concerned that, like me, 24... seems to be targeted for holding this viewpoint. Magnolia seems to have a lot of friends and those friends push around Magnolia's detractors. _pbp 13:31, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

I think your attitude on Magnolia would change if you saw even one of the thousands of violent, vivid death threats she has received regularly. I think almost anyone else would have left editing the project months ago. When you see someone who has been so abused by a vile and vicious troll being attacked, it makes you a little protective. I've had my share of terrible messages posted to me since I became an admin but these were so horrific, well I hope you never receive one (or anyone else). Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:50, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

Liz Sadly, I have seen some of those comments as they haven't all been revdel'd and many have been copied off wiki. I find them to be vile, offensive and atrocious. While I do have great sympathy for Magnolia677 and others who have had to endure MAB's grotesque onslaughts, allowing the community to take out hurt or seek revenge on other editors for what MAB has done (and possibly continues to do) is not a good outcome. 24.198.139.17 (talk) 04:46, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

I feel that PBP would have still been sanctioned if they acted the way they did towards another editor in good standing. It is, of course, human and proper to feel empathetic towards someone who has been repeatedly abused for years, but Magnolia677 is definitely not the reason why PBP got CBANned. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 04:58, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

Maybe not the only reason and it may have eventually happened anyway. However, IMO, SWATJester unfairly presented the deletion history for Magnolia677's talk page as evidence against PBP and the other two in the recent ANI case. As non-administrator's we don't get to know who made those comments at this point in time, but being somewhat familiar with the overall history, I doubt any of them were made by anyone who was a subject SWATJester's accusation. There's no justice in the actions of a misguided lynch mob. 24.198.139.17 (talk) 05:46, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

---