User talk:TzarN64

This is TzarN64's talk page, where you can send her messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: 1, 2, 3

Please do not add false templating.

I haven't left Wikipedia, and i'm not planning to. Please stop claiming that I "left Wikipedia", as you did on my talk page. @Sergecross73, @HirowoWiki: Any comments? 🗽Freedoxm🗽(talk · contribs) 17:04, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I meant to add that template to someone else, and I only added it once. TzarN64 (talk) 17:18, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We don't need you doing it for anyone though - this is not a necessary task, particularly if you're struggling with making such basic errors. If you can't tag the right person, don't be tagging anyone. This is a pretty disappointing error, especially for someone (struggling) to convince the community that you're now ready for the privilege of editing. Do not do this again. Sergecross73 msg me 17:28, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Sergecross73 She should also respect my talk page, as she's been carelessly putting templates despite my notices not to. Some of these templates are about pages that I have absolutely no involvement in. 🗽Freedoxm🗽(talk · contribs) 18:02, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Correct. Tzar, per the talk page guidelines, if someone asks you to stay off their talk/user pages, you are required to do so. You shouldn't be issuing warnings at all, with the frequency of the mistakes you're making, and tenuous grasp of Wikipedia policy you have yourself. You need to focus on your own conduct. Sergecross73 msg me 18:38, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you editing like this?

I ask this with full sincerity. You're going to get blocked at this rate, so you really need to listen to other editors more about their concerns with how you conduct yourself. Cukie Gherkin (talk) 18:18, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

could you please elaborate on which issues you are talking about? TzarN64 (talk) 18:19, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would be most conducive to discuss in Discord. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 18:22, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I do not have access to my old Kaptain Kharisma account anymore, but I have a new discord. Do you want that? TzarN64 (talk) 18:23, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, sure. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 18:29, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, what was your discord account? @Cukie Gherkin TzarN64 (talk) 19:14, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really like giving my Discord out in public, so I think I can just share my comments here:

The templating on user talk pages, including allegations of warning abuse
Nominating articles for Good Article status without fulfilling what you have to do to nominate it
Generally, disregarding comments from people about these issues

Wikipedia is a collaborative process, and I'm worried that you seem to be doing what you want and disregarding comments and criticisms. I want as few blocks as possible if it can be helped, but I worry that is going to happen. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 19:45, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The warnings yeah i understand, i learned my lesson and stopped doing them. About that good article status; My recent GA—Mario Kart Wii fits the citeria because i am the 4th biggest contributor to it. I dont mean to disgard comments about my behavior and i do mean to improve. I think i've gotten better at making and improving articles in general, but i'm still new. TzarN64 (talk) 19:47, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that you're new, but with as many people who are expressing their discontent over your editing, it's important to sit back and listen. A lot of these editors have been editing for many, many years, they have a lot of good advice to impart. I mean, in the above discussion, there's talks of opening an ANI over whether you should be blocked. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 19:59, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, what i did wasn't even that bad to be indeffed again. I did improve a ton of articles but i know that doesn't make my disruptive behavior okay. I'm trying to be better, and i'm trying not to disrupt wikipedia. I really want to collaborately edit with someone with an article one day, i tried asking panini for one. Let me tell you this, when i got called out for my GAN nominations i stopped doing them for a bit and then when i did another, i made sure to actually work on them. I did learn and i do genuinely want to improve the enyclopedia. TzarN64 (talk) 20:05, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I fully believe that if someone reported you to ANI and wrote up a detailed summary of your conduct since you've been unblocked, you'd be pretty quickly re-blocked. The number of WP:IDHT instances are stacking up. I believe you're simply extremely lucky that no one has taken the time to report you to ANI. Sergecross73 msg me 20:30, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is there anything i can do to prevent getting reblocked? I genuinely want to improve Wikipedia. TzarN64 (talk) 20:31, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would recommend reviewing edits you've made that have been reverted. Looking at your contributions, more than 10% of your edit history has been reverted. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 20:37, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Stop ignoring all the valid advice you're getting from experienced editors. There's countless things you've been advised on over the last few weeks, and you've either outright gone against it, or obviously actively ignored it. I mean, you had multiple editors giving you instructions, and you literally chose to only respond to the person who left a comment on your userpage avatar instead. An editor even pointed this out to you, and you ignored them too. I mean, come on, you're not even being subtle about it.

Your talk page had all sorts of unaddressed warnings and advice, and you simply archived it away. Which is technically your prerogative, but it does not show you in a good light in a hypothetical ANI case. Sergecross73 msg me 20:51, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't mean to archive all of my warnings and advice away like that. My talk page was getting really unnecessarily huge at the time. I will follow your advice and do better. I'm sorry TzarN64 (talk) 00:22, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@TzarN64, I strongly suggest only focusing on editing right now; you obviously don't have a strong foundation for that aspect right now given your lack of experience on Wikipedia in general. Your attempts to handle other aspects like talk warnings and good article nominations despite your tenuous grasp on revert-less editing have only raised concerns regarding your WP:COMPETENCY; your enthusiasm for Wikipedia reminds me of some stories regarding railfans that unintentionally caused accidents due to their enthusiasm, either while partaking in the hobby or conducting work for a railroad company.

Along with the suggestions Cukie Gherkin and Sergecross73 made, I would suggest making it a habit to always provide an edit message when submitting edits to avoid having them summarily reverted, no matter how minor the edit is. Also, with your experience thus far, I think you should drop all good article efforts in favor of bringing WP:Stub and WP:Start-Class articles that meet WP:GNG to at least WP:C-Class in quality; I think articles like Nintendo Selects and WiiWare have the potential to be fleshed out more, but they're low importance to WP:VG and overlooked enough that any opposition to genuine improvement attempts is unlikely. If you want to work on articles that are more important to a WikiProject or generally higher-profile, I would suggest creating WP:Userspace drafts and using your WP:Sandbox more to implement the edits you want and have someone review it (either via WP:PR or relevant talk pages) to determine if they're suitable for the target article; you can use WP:Subpages to split and organize your sandbox work if you don't want to edit all of it on one page.

All in all, just focus on editing and other basic concepts for now; assuming you don't get blocked again, you can work on the more advanced concepts when you've got a solid footing on the basic stuff. That means taking advice and requests from other editors seriously; remember that Wikipedia is a collaborative effort whose success is dependent on WP:Civility between editors who mainly contribute as WP:Volunteers, with more experienced editors having devoted countless weeks and months of effort to article improvements without expecting any rewards. Furthermore, having a consistent history of article edits that were retained or implemented would help prove your trustworthiness to other editors in convincing them to relax your current WP:1RR restriction, but that goal should be secondary to just focusing on improving your work. As the saying goes, a building is only as strong as its foundation. CascadeUrbanite (talk) 06:16, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New message to TzarN64

Please do not remove closing templates, just because of an incorrect reason. Thank you. 🗽Freedoxm🗽(talk · contribs) 19:10, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You cannot close a RfD with only 3 keeps. That does not meet the threshold of WP:SNOW nor any of the votes were speedy keeps. TzarN64 (talk) 19:14, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I only speedy kept it due to it not being 7 days. Please stop. 🗽Freedoxm🗽(talk · contribs) 19:21, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I only reverted it once. Chill. TzarN64 (talk) 19:22, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. 🗽Freedoxm🗽(talk · contribs) 21:06, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New message to TzarN64

Please do not revert my edits at Syria without explanation. Thank you. 🗽Freedoxm🗽(talk · contribs) 06:38, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits to Syria was unnecessary. TzarN64 (talk) 18:15, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, it wasn't. I was extending an invisible comment. What is wrong with that? 🗽Freedoxm🗽(talk · contribs) 18:18, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why extend an invisible comment? That edit was completely unnecessary , the original comment already did it’s job . TzarN64 (talk) 18:19, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That edit was completely unnecessary , the original comment already did it’s job makes me feel like you are not ready to revert my edits, per the extremely low-level grammar and the MOS:CURLY violation. If you inadvertently revert edits without explanation, then you are not ready to revert WP:GOODFAITH edits without marking them. Please WP:DROPTHESTICK and leave the horse carcass alone. Additionally, i'd advise that you should not ignore others' concerns. Thank you. 🗽Freedoxm🗽(talk · contribs) 18:27, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Sergecross73 any opinion? I'll file a WP:ANI report if contributing spying and non-peaceful reverts continue. 🗽Freedoxm🗽(talk · contribs) 18:20, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by “non-peaceful”? I only reverted your edit to Syria once and I’m trying to reconcile with you. TzarN64 (talk) 18:32, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What I mean by "non-peaceful", is that you need to stop persistently looking at my contribs and reverting whatever you think is "unconstructive" and "unnecessary" (you can still look at it but don't use it to revert). I am an active editor in Syrian-related articles, and that gives you no right to revert with no explanation in the edit summary. There's no reconciliation if reverts continue to be done. 🗽Freedoxm🗽(talk · contribs) 18:35, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I only edited at the Syria article once and only reverted your edit once. An actual “non-peaceful” edits would be if I just kept reverting your edit and never tried to communicate to you. TzarN64 (talk) 18:37, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you're referring to "non-peaceful", no, I do not regard them as hostile edits. I just called it that because you're persistently reverting my edits, sometimes with no explanation at all, and that is obvious that that is not peaceful. 🗽Freedoxm🗽(talk · contribs) 18:40, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tzar, if you can't disengage, I'm reporting you to ANI myself. This is absurd. Stop engaging with Freedoxm immediately. Sergecross73 msg me 21:17, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

For full transparency, I have begun a possible draft for an ANI report against you. Use this information however you want. Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 19:57, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's okay. But i don't think you should put the sock puppet stuff i did in 2022 - 2023 since i was very young at the time and didnt even know what i was doing. I am obviously an better editor now. TzarN64 (talk) 19:58, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'll make it clearer that the first paragraph is just context. Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 20:04, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you are better, but still not good enough. You've been claiming that I "left wikipedia", which you claim that you "accidentally put it", but this signals that you are still confused where to edit and where to issue templates. 🗽Freedoxm🗽(talk · contribs) 20:22, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 1 May 2025

News and notes: India cut off from Wiki money; WMF annual plan and Wikimedia programs seek comment

In the media: Feds aiming for WMF's nonprofit status

Recent research: How readers use Wikipedia health content; Scholars generally happy with how their papers are cited on Wikipedia

Arbitration report: Sysop Tinucherian removed and admonished by the ArbCom

Discussion report: Latest news from Centralized discussions

Traffic report: Of Wolf and Man

Disinformation report: At WikiCredCon, Wikipedia editors and Internet Archive discuss threats to trust in media

News from the WMF: Product & Tech Progress on the Annual Plan

Humour: Crisis erupts as furious admins, functionaries complain about crappy t-shirts

Comix: By territory

In focus: Using AI on the Russian Wikipedia: opportunities or challenges?

Community view: A deep dive into Wikimedia

Debriefing: Barkeep49's RfB debriefing

Gallery: Meet the winners of Wiki Loves Monuments 2024

Obituary: JarrahTree, JohnClarknew and Yashthepunisher

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:19, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hello TzarN64! The thread you created at the Teahouse, Why no good lists?, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days.

You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread.

See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by KiranBOT, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=KiranBOT}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). —KiranBOT (talk) 03:13, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Mario Kart Wii

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Mario Kart Wii you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of SleepyRedHair -- SleepyRedHair (talk) 17:48, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Mario Kart Wii

The article Mario Kart Wii you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article needs changes or clarifications to meet the good article criteria. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Mario Kart Wii and Talk:Mario Kart Wii/GA3 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of SleepyRedHair -- SleepyRedHair (talk) 18:41, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Mario Kart Wii

The article Mario Kart Wii you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Mario Kart Wii for comments about the article, and Talk:Mario Kart Wii/GA3 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of SleepyRedHair -- SleepyRedHair (talk) 20:03, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hello TzarN64! The thread you created at the Teahouse, I was paid to edit a wikipedia article, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days.

You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread.

See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by KiranBOT, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=KiranBOT}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). —KiranBOT (talk) 03:15, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Mario Kart 7

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Mario Kart 7 you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of NegativeMP1 -- NegativeMP1 (talk) 21:02, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you make an unsolicited edit on another person's page?

It does not matter if you think that the edit was not a big deal, the user does not want you to make changes to their user page like that and told you not to do it. The only appropriate response is to apologize and clarify that you will not do it again. It doesn't even matter if you think that the other user is wrongheaded, it's theirs. Please learn to behave diplomatically with other users, for your sake and the website's sake as well. Cukie Gherkin (talk) 21:12, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Mario Kart 7

The article Mario Kart 7 you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Mario Kart 7 for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of NegativeMP1 -- NegativeMP1 (talk) 03:23, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Steve's Lava Chicken.mp3 listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Steve's Lava Chicken.mp3, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. λ NegativeMP1 00:12, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Steves Lava Chicken.jpeg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Steves Lava Chicken.jpeg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. λ NegativeMP1 00:14, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1RR violation

You are under a 1RR restriction, why are you getting into edit wars? Cukie Gherkin (talk) 00:44, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I didn’t really notice I was reverting twice, so I apologize. @NegativeMP1 has decided to create an edit war on a song about lava chicken. I don’t even know how that even happens. TzarN64 (talk) 00:47, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There was no edit war. I reinstated an article that you tried to delete with no reason provided and instead told you to take it to AFD. That's literally the exact opposite of an edit war in the sense that I was encouraging a discussion. Or at least trying to. λ NegativeMP1 00:48, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Leaving a warning on Negative's talk page about edit warring is explicit warning abuse considering you're not only involved, but are the only one who did more reversions than allowed. Cukie Gherkin (talk) 00:52, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tzar, I've seen enough violations, accusations, dismissive warnings, abuse of warnings, and denial. There is an extremely high chance I will file an ANI report in the next few days. Freedoxm (talk · contribs) 01:02, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tzar has already broken her 1RR restriction before in case anyone didn't know. Now this is the second time. Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 01:07, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Confusion regarding Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steve's Lava Chicken

As you are an involved editor, I do not believe it is permissible for you to make a non-admin closure of the discussion. You can certainly withdraw your nomination for deletion, but absent that, closing the discussion as kept might mislead readers into thinking that this was open for the usual full five days. I would suggest you revert to a pre-closure state, and then note your withdrawal of the nomination, and wait for an administrator to close the discussion accordingly. Cheers! BD2412 T 01:12, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t even know what do to anymore. There’s a very real chance I get blocked for ever because I keep letting my emotions get ahead of me, which is why I keep having problems with other editors. This saddens me because I genuinely do like improving the encyclopedia. I might just take a wiki break or something I don’t know TzarN64 (talk) 01:19, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I keep telling you to focus on getting basic editing down. I don't understand why you keep doing everything but that. You keep doing these poor GA and AFD noms that get quickly turned down instead of doing the basics. I just don't get it. Sergecross73 msg me 01:29, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I consider this to be a sufficient resolution to my concern. BD2412 T 01:32, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, TzarN64. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 01:20, 5 May 2025 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template.[reply]

May 2025

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. λ NegativeMP1 01:33, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for ~~abusing multiple accounts. 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.~~disruptive editing per the discussion at ANI.

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 ~~~~}}. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 04:14, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Striked because it’s now obvious those accounts were a Joe job against me. TzarN64 (talk) 19:29, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@The Bushranger: ? BD2412 T 22:14, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Check the block log. There's doubts about the socking, but still clear consensus for blocking from the ANI discussion. Sergecross73 msg me 22:21, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please, TzarN64, take the opportunity to log off and stay away from the talk page while things work themselves out. No last minute pleas for an unblock that you quickly revert. No WP:POINTY editing of block messages. You're only going to make things more stressful for yourself, and when you eventually appeal your ban, you want people remembering the grace with which you accepted the community's input, not 11th-hour drama. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 22:26, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Corrected the block notice to note the updated block rationalie. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 22:35, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail!

Hello, TzarN64. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 04:30, 5 May 2025 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 04:30, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hold on? What?

Apparently I’m getting accused of owning sock puppet accounts now?? I didn’t know this. This is incorrect as I’ve logged out of Wikipedia. These accounts don’t even belong to me, and I didn’t know about this until Tarlby emailed me. Could a checkuser please confirm that I didn’t own these accounts? Thanks. TzarN64 (talk) 04:48, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I feel like I’ve been framed. I have no reason to continue using socks, and I was perfectly content with leaving Wikipedia for a good while. These are names I don’t even use? Like come on? MiiWiiU? Even if I was gonna sock why would I disrupt my own ANI? TzarN64 (talk) 04:50, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t know what to do. These accounts aren’t me. I’ve been framed but nobody will believe me. They’ve been created hours next to each other just to disrupt my own ANI. Dude TzarN64 (talk) 04:51, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t know if anyone is reading this but please, please I promise on everything, that those accounts aren’t even mine. I was going to go to sleep (it’s 12 :52 in my time zone) but I woke up to being falsely banned for socking again TzarN64 (talk) 04:53, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Checkuser already checked the accounts. All of them were confirmed to be you. Good night. ThomasO1989 (talk) 04:57, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That’s not true. The SPI case hasn’t even confirmed a checkuser checked those accounts. TzarN64 (talk) 05:01, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Are you KIDDING ME. Another account suspected to be me? I can’t man TzarN64 (talk) 05:03, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Freedoxm @Tarlby@Asilvering @NegativeMP1 @Cukie Gherkin Please you guys seeing this right? These accounts are making violent threats now??? I’d never even do anything like this. This is messed up. TzarN64 (talk) 05:06, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Even though I still think you need some sort of CBAN, I can agree with you that some of what these accounts are saying is on the extreme side and doesn't seem like your behavior. λ NegativeMP1 05:09, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I’m fine with being banned. What I did in the AFD was not right and I’m sorry. But I hope you know I’ll never do any sort of harassment or personal attacks. That’s something I’m absolutely against and would never do. TzarN64 (talk) 05:10, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I agree with @NegativeMP1. I have never seen Tzar edit volatilely with threats and personal attacks. Forget my previous accusations, it's the past. I'm sorry. Freedoxm (talk · contribs) 05:12, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Look. I have nothing against anyone who wants me CBanned, like I said before I believe I deserve it. But please know I would never scoop to this low to create personal attacks and make threats. I don’t ever swear here but that’s LITERALLY fucked the hell up. Please restore my user page @Freedoxm TzarN64 (talk) 05:15, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@TzarN64, I'm afraid, but I cannot, even in your defense. I'm not allowed to remove SP tags, only administrators and checkusers can. Sorry. Freedoxm (talk · contribs) 05:17, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It’s fine, it’s whatever. TzarN64 (talk) 05:18, 5 May 2025 (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).

TzarN64 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Let it be clear I do not want to get unblocked. I do feel like I deserve the ANI and some sort of punishment. I just want an check user to come in and prove I don’t own those fake sock puppet accounts I didn’t even know about these accounts existed until @Tarlby emailed me. And then I’m like what the hell? I logged out of Wikipedia before the ANI was made. These accounts are very obviously not mine because they’re made like hours between eachother and only exist to start chaos at my own ANI. I believe someone created these accounts to frame me as a sock puppeteer. If I was really going to sock puppet, I’m not going to my own ANI to start up chaos, that’s stupid. Second. I’ve noticed it was odd that @Freedoxm was the first to replace my user page with my block message and saying that “justice was served”. I don’t understand why would anyone would do this as I recognized my mistakes before and I wanted to take a break from Wikipedia before returning. Please, please actually take this message seriously and bring in a checkuser, im begging you. I never did any of these sock puppet accounts or anything like that. Please. Thank you.TzarN64 (talk) 05:00, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Checkuser has returned inconclusive verdict on the owner of the multiple socks.

Since this request explicitly states that TzarN64 does not wish to be unblocked, I am closing this procedurally as decline.

(That seems to deal with the entire substance of this request.) DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:20, 5 May 2025 (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.

TzarN64 (talk) 05:00, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Making an unblock request just to comment on what's going on and not as an unblock request is not a good idea, at all. There's a growing consensus in the ANI thread to WP:CBAN even without a sockpuppetry issue. The SPI will sort it out, but for you, what I would strongly urge you to do is once this sorts out, to take a few years away from Wikipedia, and work on other projects that interest you, and grow from those experiences. Wikipedia will still be here two years, five years, or 10 years down the road, and I think there's a very good chance that you'd be extended another opportunity at some point. Best wishes to you. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 05:06, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I get I’ll be sanctioned. I’m perfectly fine with that. What I’m not fine with is being framed of owning fake sock accounts that I never made. TzarN64 (talk) 05:07, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And there's an active SPI request that will sort it out one way or the other. Pinging everyone is not going to help your cause at all. Whatever happens is going to happen. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 05:09, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. I’m sorry. I’m just scared, I’ve never dealt with anyone trying to frame me and being impersonated. I just feel so… powerless because although I did bad things I never did any of this. TzarN64 (talk) 05:11, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’m just going to go to sleep now. This is too much for me to bare. I don’t think I can say my age on here but I’m still a very young editor on Wikipedia being framed of sending threats and attacks against people. And I’ve never did that. I’m hoping that a checkuser and the SPI clears everything up in the end. TzarN64 (talk) 05:17, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@TzarN64, technically speaking, it's possible that the sock accounts were yours, but it's also possible that they were created simply to harass you. In my opinion the CU results are in your favour, combined with the responses from @NegativeMP1 and @Freedoxm. That is to say, I'm extremely willing to believe that you are not the sockmaster here.

In any event, from the point of view of "the community", it doesn't really matter in the long term - I don't think you should try to get unbanned for at least a few years, and if you come back in a few years and say "yeah, I disrupted the ANI thread with a bunch of socks, I'm so embarrassed, please forgive me for this dumb thing I did when I was really young", I think you'd be forgiven for it. For now, take care of yourself. -- asilvering (talk) 17:02, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thing is, I never did those accounts. I remember someone on the discord telling me that the CU only confirmed the accounts relation to eachother, not me. My original plan was to just to get CBanned for awhile, then to do a common offer and start a fresh start on a new account. Then, I’d avoid doing the same mistakes that got me into this ANI in the first place. TzarN64 (talk) 17:04, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@TzarN64 As of right now, you're not eligible for a WP:CLEANSTART unless if the SPI confirms it's not you. Freedoxm (talk · contribs) 17:06, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’m waiting for that. I’m confident the SPI can confirm that those accounts do not belong to me and this weird impersonation ends. I probably won’t be able to fix the SPI and ANI stuff for a bit until a like a few months from now anyway TzarN64 (talk) 17:08, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Asilvering, @CoffeeCrumbs: Aditionally, i've found not just behavioral differences, but also punctuation differences. Tzar often uses a curly quotation (’), compared to the suspected socks who always uses a straight quotation ('). This gives me more confidence that Tzar was not socking. Freedoxm (talk · contribs) 17:12, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You...probably don't have the right mindset in all of this. Most editors struggle to ever convince the community to unban them the first time. One should never be making plans like "My original plan was to just to get CBanned for awhile.". The community isn't going to keep going back and forth on this... Sergecross73 msg me 17:12, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You’re right. But honestly I don’t really know what to do. I genuinely do want to contribute to the encyclopedia as I proved with my previous helpful contributions to other articles, I guess we’ll see what happens from here. I believe that @NegativeMP1 was right in bringing me to SPI and I do believe they did that in good faith. I do deserve some sort of punishment over what I did in the AfD. But again, we’ll see. TzarN64 (talk) 17:17, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but I don't believe you're ready to be working on a collaborative project like Wikipedia. Over and over again you ignored others valid advice in favor of doing whatever it is you felt like doing. And you kept doing it in very visible areas, where you continually broke people's trust. I kept telling you that this would happen if you didn't stop. And you didn't stop. And now you're blocked again. You had any number chances to stop and change, but you refused.

Honestly, if people have no interest following rules and standard practices, maybe you should try writing your own blog or running your own social media/influencer type account? Something where you're free to do whatever you please and not have to listen to others?

There's also tons of fan wikias that feature less rules too. Perhaps there's a Nintendo fan wiki you can join and contribute to or something. Sergecross73 msg me 17:29, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Sergecross73, I don't think any of those are good ideas. Tzar is young and has (likely) just been harassed by some randoms on the internet who saw fresh meat at ANI. @TzarN64, it's time to go dark for a while. Log off, go spend some time with people you care about, forget about wiki editing for now. Come back in a few years. -- asilvering (talk) 17:34, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just suggesting something harmless like creating an anonymous BlueSky account and simply writing about their thoughts on video games there, in case they wish to continue to write, but not be constricted by Wikipedia policy and structure. Sergecross73 msg me 17:51, 5 May 2025 (UTC) [reply]

Yeah, I get it. But my advice to a minor who's being harassed online is always going to start with a) disengage and b) go dark. -- asilvering (talk) 17:54, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I already have other social medias. And I’ve proved already that I could be in an encyclopedic website like Wikipedia before. I’m just going to take an extended wiki break before returning, but thank you for Youre advice. TzarN64 (talk) 17:53, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Freedoxm, Tzar is not eligible for a clean start regardless. -- asilvering (talk) 17:21, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine, Tzar. I didn't mean to imply that you did. What I'm saying is that even if you did, you could ultimately be forgiven for it. The CU has already been done, there's nothing more to wait for. Now's the time to take your extended wikibreak. -- asilvering (talk) 17:18, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for Mario Kart Wii

Mario Kart Wii has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 20:36, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]