Character status Edit
Featured Article Edit
Hello. Your Featured Article vote has been removed, as you don't yet meet voting eligibility. You need to have at least twenty significant contributions to the site and you haven't contributed to any articles yet besides Talk pages. Hopefully you'll be eligible by next month. --Proudhug 01:55, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
- Actualy, I did have an account before, but I forgot the password. I hope you don't charge me with sockpuppety. I'm gonna be leaving anyway. I might come back to make season 7 edits.--Black Kirby 22:31, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Well, either way, this account doesn't meet the requirements, so I had to remove your vote. Also, please keep conversations in one spot, rather than spread over multiple pages. --Proudhug 01:53, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Please read our Spoiler policy. Wiki 24 does not include any information from unaired episodes of 24. This includes information from press releases, trailers and cast/crew interviews. Here you will find any and all information from the first six seasons of the show, plus all of the spin-off materials released so far. Information from Season 7 is strictly prohibited from being posted anywhere on the site until it begins airing. --Proudhug 19:09, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, so much for the season 7 trailer on the main page. I'll do the best I can in helping you, but I don't know how much help I can be. Anyways, see you later.--Black Kirby 22:03, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
I've decided to leave this site for a while. I might come back sometime. But I think I'd prefer Wikipedia. At least it contains spoilers. I might return once season 7 premeiers to make season 7 updates.--Black Kirby 19:41, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Just want to get one thing strate Edit
I know that through my unconstructive comments, this may have lead to a certain amount of you beleiving that I'm a vandal. I just want to say that my intentions on this site are always, and nothing but, to edit the wiki. Yes, I'm still kinda new here, so I have'nt made any article edits. There are actualy 2 reasons for that: 1: I am mostly interested in making edits about season 7, which is forbidden by the policy, and 2: The articles on this site are basicaly perfect the way they are, and I don't want to make a single edit without dicussing them first. And I may have had a tough use of words lately, but I don't intend to hurt anyone's feelings with my harsh words. In fact, the only harsh sentense I remember using was to Proudhug: "I don't know how to add new subjects on the top of the page, so just deal with it." Now first off, why? Why does it have to be on top? Why can't new subjects be on the bottom like normal? And believe me, I tried adding them on top, but it was too hard. However, I regret that statement, and yes, he is mad at me, so don't ask about that ok? But I did apologise, although I doubt he'll forgive me anytime soon, sense his reposnse was, well, offensive, and it made me sad that he took it that way. But Proudhug, if you're reading this which I doubt you are, understand that I did'nt mean what I said. Well, I just wanted to let all the doubtful people what my intentions were. Goodbye friends, and feel free to help me, I could sure use it.--Black Kirby 23:45, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
- Hey there, I think you've made the right decision to take a voluntary leave of absence for awhile. Sometimes that is what's needed to put things in perspective. Learning from mistakes is how everyone learns the ropes at a wiki, but you've got to remember to look around for precedent before making edits. For example, unless a fact about a character's appearances is meaningfully connected to the plot of the show or to some other element, we can't accept it in an article (so the fact about the Wayne and Mandy appearances, while interesting for a few fans, is not significant for a wiki that is specifically tailored to be an encyclopedia, not a trivia archive). We actually have a Wiki 24:Trivia archive, but you will see that they are all facts about production or something similar, because otherwise it would be a sprawling mess. There is an almost infinite combination of such "appearance patterns" and it is not in our interest to catalogue them all.
- If you do return during or after the airing of season 7, just look around to see if your editing idea has been done in a few places elsewhere to establish a reasonable precedent, and bring it up in the Talk page if you're still unsure. Equally importantly, spell check everything before you post it! You've spelled "straight" wrong in this topic title and "Wayne" wrong in another topic title among others, and it makes a terrible impression. Spelling errors slip in to the episode guides sometimes but it goes without saying we hate them here. Just a few things to look into before stopping back over to make further changes. I hope you can sort it out over time, and at the very least, keep watching 24. – Blue Rook 19:29, 11 January 2008 (UTC)talkcontribs
Thanks for the advice, and don't worry, I'm watching season 3 right now. (even though I have already seen every episode in the series.)--Black Kirby 22:05, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Moved from Blue Rook user talk:
Hey Blue Rook, Proudhug's still mad at me over a comment I made to him 2 days ago. He said that he will no longer help me with anything, which I think is a bit harsh. I keep trying to apologise to him, but he just keeps reverting them. Can you help me?--Black Kirby 23:04, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
- Remember, like anybody else, Proudhug is perfectly entitled to decide whether or not to accept apologies. Where you say that you "keep trying to apologise," you aren't recognizing that you're spamming the wiki (repeated posting of the same thing over and over). Spamming is a violation of policy, and definitely not a good way to try to make amends. Check out your user Talk page, I wrote some suggestions for you there. If you wish to reply, respond over there (frequent users, especially active administrators like me and Proudhug, always look out for the most recent changes, so I will see it there). – Blue Rook 23:51, 11 January 2008 (UTC)contribs
- I saw your advice, and responded to it before I posted this. But he's an administrator, and I'll need his help eventualy, and I just feel that he acted rather harsh, especialy when he sarcasticaly said "Have a nice day." at the end.Black Kirby 00:20, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
- You'll need his help eventually? The discussion pages where you have posted are already littered with his pointers. I can't blame him for being sarcastic there, and I was frankly quite surprised that he didn't keep his word (on his talk page) and impose a block for the continued spamming. Read carefully when admins give pointers. I am one too, and I asked to keep this discussion to the page where this started (your talk page) but you continued it on mine. - Blue Rook 04:50, 12 January 2008 (UTC)contribs
- I'm sorry. I'm just saying that as he's the lead admin, I might need his help for something. But now, he'll never listen to me again because of a stupid comment that I made to him. So you're supprised that I'm not blocked because I've been trying to apologise to him. He thinks that just because he created the site in the first place, he thinks he knows everything about 24. Well, did it ever occour to him that I might know something about 24 that he does'nt? Probaly not. And the fact that he says that he will revert everything that I try to say to him, shows that he's abbusing his power. I've been trying to help him, and THIS is how he treats me? By saying that he's no longer interested in my existense and threatens to ban me if I do anything else, and then finishes of by saying "Have a nice day." How mature is that? I mean, he's almoat 30. I'm 13, and I've shown less harshness than that. He not only insulted me largely, he made me feel unwelcomed. And for what? Because I told him that I can't figure out how to put new topics on the top of the page, and he's going to have to deal with it himself? That's a silly reason to yell at someone and threaten to ban them. And he's no longer interested in me? All I've done is trying to dicuss what should be added to certain articles. Forgive me if I exsist. Don't ban me for saying this, all I'm saying is that I deserve just as much respect as everyone else on this site.--Black Kirby 05:28, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
A bunch of things you've said here are incorrect, leaving whatever semblance of an argument you seem to be grasping at in shambles:
1. I'm not surprised that you haven't been blocked for apologizing, but for spamming. Once again, please stop putting words in people's mouths.
2. Nowhere can Proudhug be found saying or indicating that he knows everything about 24, or that he thinks there are no useful things you might know.
3. We have not reverted anything that we wouldn't also revert if someone else posted it. Proudhug reverted your spam, and also the edits that did not fit policy... and so have I, for that matter. I've taken the time to explain why each of the non-spam edits were reverted, and they are all policy reasons unconnected to you personally. It's annoying when your edits are reverted, but it takes a mature Wikian to realize that they were not reverted for some personal vendetta.
4. When admins revert edits, we are not automatically abusing power. It is our responsibility to remove spam and edits which don't conform to policy.
5. You were NOT threatened with a block because of that single comment, but, as Proudhug hinted at, for a pattern of antagonistic and bizarre Talk page arguments and for strange behavior like voting for the example over on the Featured Article page (with a misspelled word, no less).
It's hard to apologize, so I give you credit for that, but this dispute can't take up any more of my time, either. If you push this matter, I'll know that you're looking to divide up the admins now and cause a disruption, and will ban you for spamming AND trolling. Take a month or so off... this can't be good for your health. If you insist on making edits, come back in a few weeks and start by spellchecking some episode guides. No more about this, though, because it's driving at nothing. I would understand if you were blocked and were contesting the block, but you're trying to force an acceptance of an apology with more inflammatory words (hint: it's a bad idea to say an admin is both an abuser of power and immature when they're enforcing policy and exercising their right to be pithy). Don't try to get the last word, just be glad there is no block... otherwise there will be one. – Blue Rook 09:43, 12 January 2008 (UTC)talkcontribs
- He said that he's no longer interested in me about ANYTHING, including dicussing articles, which, in my opinion, is just wrong. But for the sake of me NOT being blocked, I'll stop. This is not meant to be the last word, just trying to let you know I understand, barely. Goodbye.--Black Kirby 16:38, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
- (sigh) Season 7 would've aired tommorrow, which would've given me a reason to stay. Anyway, goodbye.--Black Kirby 17:15, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Sup.Sith24ssb 23:17, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Oh crap Edit
Dude you scared the crap out of me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Sith24ssb 23:36, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
You are here by banned from editing any articles on this site.Sith24ssb 23:59, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
- Oh ha ha. Very mature. When someone tricks you, get revenge on them by doing exactly what they did. C'mon dude, lets make edits to this encyclopedia.Black Kirby 00:05, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Ahhhhhhhhh sarcasm.Sith24ssb 00:07, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Dude when you send me messages your titles scare me cause you sound like an administrator.Sith24ssb 02:03, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Tony Almeida Edit
What exactly happened when Tony was "killed?"Sith24ssb 02:36, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
You`re lucky cause you acully got a welcome.Sith24ssb 02:38, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
please stop Edit
pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeease stop making your message so long.Sith24ssb 03:06, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Hey I asked BlueRock if you could be my personal adviser on my edits.Sith24ssb 22:25, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
If blocked Edit
If you get blocked for all this stuff I will take all punishment with you.Sith24ssb 23:50, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
User block Edit
I did some poking around with help from the Staff at the Wikia IRC, and it has become clear that Sith24ssb is a sock puppet of Black Kirby. According to a Checkuser, they don't apparently share the exact same IP, but there is a veritable mound of compelling evidence which is certainly enough for me.
The talk page for Wikipedia user "Green Kirby" includes a report from admin Alison that is of interest. Of tantamount importance in this case is this rather telling Wikipedia category, which lists the confirmed sock puppets of Green Kirby. Among the other authorities involved in rooting out this sock puppet user and troll were admins Anthony, SirFozzie, Tinkleheimer, and Atomic Religione.
From the user and talk pages of the various sock puppet accounts it is seen that:
- Sock puppet names often include star wars references (here, Sith24ssb).
- As indicated by other sock puppet names (blue bowser, luigi wars), as well as this hysterical attempt at an adminship self-nomination, Super Mario is a theme for this person. As of this date, Feb 27, the user page for Sith24ssb indicates a love for Super Smash Bros. Who would have thought?
- The nature of the "dialogue" between Black Kirby and Sith24ssb has been seen already on Wikipedia between sock puppet accounts and reveals much. Many of Black Kirby's own attributes are have been externalized onto Sith24ssb (such as imagined positive attributes which validate his continued presence: "He's a good kid, and wants to help," as well as the negative ones from which he can learn, especially the recognition that "does'nt seem to understand the encyclopedia" and his edits are "not good") for the purpose of giving Black Kirby an outlet to finally be the experienced direction-giver, as opposed to the recipient of the advice. This is also done in an attempt to openly showcase and legitimize the maturity Black Kirby has apparently acquired. I am not a student of psychology, but this strikes me as smacking of standard case study material for some minor sort of developmental, early teenage identity issue. It also is nearly identical to the alternative identity construction problem found for years on Usenet, and differs merely in the medium (this is a wiki, not Usenet).
- See the discussions here and here.
I've wasted the better part of an hour on this matter today already. Combined with my own and Proudhug's previous expenditures of energy on this person, this is certainly enough. Even if all this evidence is somehow false, this block is still imposed. This user's accounts are banned for trolling, spamming, sock puppetry, as well as too many argumentative, snide, and borderline-hostile comments, and finally being by far an overall detriment to the wiki. In addition, since the very essence of this person's trolling is to querulously and tactlessly spam for apologies/forgiveness/explanations/and the like, his/her talk pages have been protected as well. Like any concerned user, I would rather have an off-season downtime on Wiki 24 with few edits, than an off-season downtime with many edits where all of them are from or in response to a confirmed serial wiki-troll. Other established users and admins are of course free to discuss this, but with reference to this specific user, I consider this matter to be closed. Kirby, please move on, and re-examine the lessons you were supposed to have learned from the prior sock puppetry debacle on Wikipedia. – Blue Rook 01:03, 28 February 2008 (UTC)talkcontribs
- Thank you so much for your diligence, Blue Rook. I'm so glad I didn't waste any more time with this troll, but extremely grateful to yourself for taking this effort. You're an invaluable asset to Wiki 24, for sure. It's unfortunate your precious time had to be spent on something like this, however. --Proudhug 04:04, 28 February 2008 (UTC)