Information icon.svg

Campaigning for the RationalMedia Foundation 2021 board of trustees election is underway!

User talk:Plutocow

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

I'd just like to ask why I was banned? This is my first time registering an account — Unsigned, by: Plutocow / talk / contribs

My mistake. I read crow instead of cow in your username. If you stay, you'll probably understand the problem. GeeJayK (talk) 20:50, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Basically, there's this long-term troll, hellbent on making a pervert and criminal out of one of our users whom he has a grudge against, who got coop-banned for harassing said user, and has since continued to haunt us like the Ghost of the Christmas Past by abusing multiple easily-recognized sock accounts. He loves to use the word "Raven" (or some variant to evade the abuse filter) or "Crowtin" (a rather silly insult he often threw at User:Sirius, a mod and tech he also has a grudge against) in his names. --Goatspeed. Watch meπŸ‡ΊπŸ‡ΈCircularREmail2.gifasoningπŸ‡ΊπŸ‡ΈSee what I've been messing around with 19:43, 8 February 2021 (UTC)


New logo large.png Welcome to RationalWiki, Plutocow!

Check out our guide for newcomers and our community standards!

Tell us how you found RationalWiki here!

If you are interested in contributing:

Because of your edits to and time on the wiki, Autopatrolled has been added to your user rights. This lets you bypass most of the abuse filters, bypass the CAPTCHA, and edit more frequently. If you have questions, bleat ask away.

We hope you enjoy your newfound α΄˜α΄α΄‘α΄‡Κ€ — and these external tools:
  • Rbutr shows user-submitted rebuttals to your current webpage.
  • Google Scholar Button (Chrome, Firefox) searches your highlighted text in Google Scholar. Easily check academic citations!
  • and can save permanent copies of webpages. Never lose a crank website or racist Tweet ever again! Christopher (talk) 22:00, 7 February 2021 (UTC)


Knight CommanderIn ServiceTo HerGoatness 00:35, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Some context[edit]

The user you just unblocked is probably a sock of Conservapedia:Conservative. The info in that article is years out of date, and probably a bit confusing if you’re not familiar with conservapedia itself, but it should give you a general idea of who you’re dealing with. His main RW account Newton was banned years ago for some reason or other, now he just posts about the decline of atheism on people’s talk pages. Pretty harmless, but he is meant to be banned. Christopher (talk) 21:13, 20 February 2021 (UTC)


HardWork.jpg Tireless Worker Award
We, the unseen godless cabal (there isn't one) at RationalWiki, hereby present the Tireless Worker Award to Plutocow for his masterful creation of a brand-new nav template and its icon.
--Goatspeed. Watch meπŸ‡ΊπŸ‡ΈCircularREmail2.gifasoningπŸ‡ΊπŸ‡ΈSee what I've been messing around with 00:27, 21 February 2021 (UTC)


As somebody who spent a lot of time on the Joe Manchin article, I am happy to see you move it to mainspace (oh, and for all those contributions you made while it was still a draft too)!-Flandres (talk) 18:31, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

talk page[edit]

i just did take it the page, but you were just too quick to reflexly revert revert revert revert. prick AMassiveGay (talk) 17:12, 25 February 2021 (UTC)


Please don't block IPs for pi months. That's way too long for an IP considering that trolls just cycle through them. You could end up impacting an innocent person by mistake. It's a small risk, but it's one that comes with zero benefit since trolls know how to change their IPs. It's best to just give them a short block of pi days or hours. Pizza SLICE.gifChef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 19:04, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

This person has had multiple pi week blocks yet keeps returning with the same IP to make the exact same edits. A longer block is necessary in this particular case. Plutocow (talk) 19:06, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
Alright, that's fair. Pizza SLICE.gifChef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 19:07, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

So that I get this right[edit]

Should I use "they", "them" and "their" when referring to you? Spud (talk) 06:51, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Yes Plutocow (talk) 06:52, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
OK. Got it. Thanks for telling me. Spud (talk) 06:55, 27 February 2021 (UTC)


Could you go easy on the blocks? It’s best to assume ignorance over malice, if someone is malicious any damage they do is easily reverted. Our often ignored blocking policy is very lenient. Christopher (talk) 21:33, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

My bad, you were right to block that account. After a bunch of them started appearing it’s almost certain they’re spambots, although the lack of links to any other sites means their purpose is impossible to guess. Other than William Howard Taft, none of the names appear to belong to real people. Christopher (talk) 22:02, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Talk:Jack Buckby[edit]

Why did you revert the text on Talk:Jack Buckby? Bongolian (talk) 04:41, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Probable trolling, given the "Smear piece written by an Antifa" Plutocow (talk) 04:42, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
Did you look at the Wikipedia link that he gave? Bongolian (talk) 04:42, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
We already mention his claims of leaving the far right. Plutocow (talk) 04:43, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
OK, thanks. That should be good enough unless 'Jack Busby' wants to make any specific assertions that something is factually incorrect. Bongolian (talk) 04:46, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
We don't remove talk page content.-Hastur! (talk) 06:11, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Zachary Taylor revert[edit]

What's up with that? The sentence makes no grammatical sense right now. Knight CommanderIn ServiceTo HerGoatness 09:50, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Given that Johnson was a raving white supremacist who tried to get Tennessee exempt from emancipation, I don't think he regretted it.-Flandres (talk) 14:26, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
The latter, as in exclusively referring to Grant. Plutocow (talk) 16:01, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
Yeah sorry, my dyslexia's hitting in again. I read it as "the later". I've no doubt that Johnson never regretted anything. Apologies for unnecessarily bothering you. Knight CommanderIn ServiceTo HerGoatness 17:39, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
Sorry if I sounded a little harsh, if you have dyslexia then I understand. Plutocow (talk) 19:21, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
No worries. Knight CommanderIn ServiceTo HerGoatness 19:47, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Oxy[edit]


What's your Discord? β€” Oxyaena Harass 09:28, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Didn’t you quit Discord ages ago? Pizza SLICE.gifChef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 13:20, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
I don't really use Discord, sorry. Plutocow (talk) 18:12, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
[EC]I’m not saying I believe it, but you make a good case. Doing this (and then collapsing everything) doesn’t help you case, Plutocow. Their first edit is also a little suspicious. Christopher (talk) 18:14, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
Yeah, no. There are many people who are trans/NB, on the left, and on the spectrum. Plus, I have a history of editing as a BON which goes way back, which should be enough to disprove this "theory". I didn't want to respond since HBC is clearly trying to start shit, but I guess I have to if you are taking it seriously. Plutocow (talk) 18:18, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
The second one is literally because one schmuck sysop or moderator thought they were GodlessRaven because the name Plutocow has "cow" in it and "cow" is one letter shy of being "crow". MarioSuperstar77 (talk) 18:19, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
It takes two seconds to check the block log to see that case being true. MarioSuperstar77 (talk) 18:20, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
Your BoN edits do poke a hole in the accusations, and you’re right that the rest of the β€œevidence” doesn’t amount to much. There’s no way you could’ve known you’d get banned because of the cow/crow thing, so it couldn’t have been an elaborate setup. If you are Oxy, you’ve done a good enough job at covering your tracks that you deserve to get away with it; sorry, I shouldn’t have been so quick to judge. Christopher (talk) 18:27, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
Also, I would like to point out all of this is circumstantial evidence coming from a user who has been obsessed with Oxy for quite a while.-Flandres (talk) 18:30, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
That troll is only asking to get switfly banned. Next time they do something weird I'll make sure she is permanently banned, even if it has to be a Chicken Coop. MarioSuperstar77 (talk) 18:33, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
@Christopher So now, you are claiming I am Plutocow, wow. Guess anyone who thinks Oxyaena is not the literal spawn of satan is a sockpuppet of hers, might as well add ShabiDoo and LeftyGreenMario on the list since they defended Oxy too. MarioSuperstar77 (talk) 18:32, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
Wait, when did I say that?-Flandres (talk) 18:33, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
Claiming various leftist users are sockpuppets of mine would be hilarious if it weren't for the paranoid harassment of anyone that's farther left than socdem because of the vague suspicion they may be me. β€” Oxyaena Harass 18:34, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
What the fuck are you talking about? I retracted any suspicions I had about Plutocow, and never said you were a sock of anyone. Christopher (talk) 18:35, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

β”Œβ”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”˜The schmuck sysop is here, and very offended by your post, Mario. And as someone who was once banned for being a sock (by Oxy) even though there was much less evidence, I think everything said is circunstancial. Another reason to enable checkusers on RW. GeeJayK (talk) 18:37, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

I was angry when I wrote that comment, sorry. I agree with the addition of Checkuser. MarioSuperstar77 (talk) 18:41, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
Same, though I don't know how that'd work. Would it be for all sysops, or only Techs and Mods? Corvette (chat) 18:43, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
(EC)We have had checkuser abused in the past, unfortunately. Also, I will poliety ask everybody in this thread to calm down. HBCs' sad sockpuppet claims are going to be ignored, nobody has to be angry over any misapplied punishment, and what we have left is just users who don't like each other assuming the worst in each other.-Flandres (talk) 18:44, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
The RW community has repeatedly voiced its adamant opposition to checkuser. Pizza SLICE.gifChef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 00:44, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
ik other ppl also don’t want it so this is basically pointless, but god please don’t do the checkuser please like just stop the other problems don’t do the checkuser. tbh idk if this is already the case but if not, just make it so ban evasion things are for someone acting in the Bad Way ig. Sockhunting is bad and also checkuser is scary. just some tips for the website ig, like it doesn’t really matter but personally, checkuser would be a hard β€œno” line on me using this site because of how much personal info I’ve already put on here that can’t meaningfully be erased. And maybe that is a concern for some other ppl also idk uhhh I should really go now and such sorry πŸ’ž A S E L A ΰ€•ΰ₯ΰ€°ΰ€Ύ πŸ’ž 18:48, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
ok last edit for REAL (this is asela) i will always be lmoaing at the fact that I was never accused of being an oxy sock despite being also a trans autistic anarchist Ban after edit 1 (talk) 19:16, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
Don’t worry, checkuser will never be a thing here. Pizza SLICE.gifChef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 00:45, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
I think it’s obvious here that Plutocow is just yet another sock of Bongolian! Pizza SLICE.gifChef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 00:39, 13 March 2021 (UTC)


If he wants to make a prick of himself, let him.--Mercian (talk) 00:08, 13 March 2021 (UTC)


I've removed your sysop bit for your repeated banning of User:AngeloJohnGage, whom you continue asserting is a sockpuppet of "Mikey". RW has no mechanism for confirming whether this is true or not, so without better evidence for permanently banning a user who appears to be contesting the content of an article about him, knock it off. I'll return your user rights in 12 hours if you confirm that you've read and understand RW's block policy. Nutty Roux (talk) 00:39, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

See your talkpage. Plutocow (talk) 00:40, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Your assumption isn't evidence. Stop abusing your sysop rights. Nutty Roux (talk) 00:46, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Block parameters- β€œcannot edit own talk page”[edit]

It’s not an issue with the latest block, but it’s not a good habit to get into. It’s only used when there’s a need for it, ie the vandal is spamming their own talk page, most don’t bother and just make a new account or give up. Christopher (talk) 19:32, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Similarly, don’t protect talk pages unless they’re really being spammed. Two instances of vandalism isn’t enough to warrant it, plus 104 says he’s gone now. Christopher (talk) 21:18, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

About TAOB[edit]

Where was it? I'm not saying he didn't do it, I just would like to know what happened. If it was already deleted nevermind, but I think you should show a mod too. GeeJayK (talk) 23:35, 18 March 2021 (UTC) Nevermind, Just saw it on the Saloon bar. GeeJayK (talk) 23:36, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, it was deleted. Plutocow (talk) 23:37, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Nice to have another Spanish speaker and translator here[edit]

You might like to add yourself to the category Hablantes de espaΓ±ol. Spud (talk) 07:49, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I'm trying to make some edits to a page and you keep calling me a long term vandal. Do you want to talk about it?[edit]

So, you keep undoing my edits and locking the page of my interest. I don't care about RW mission, and only one other page has interested me so far. Perhaps more will interest me, perhaps they won't. Why are you blocking me?

I'd like an explanation if you don't mind? — Unsigned, by: Mytechtoday / talk / contribs

I'll take that as an admission that you have been socking this whole time, and you have not once taken your proposed edits to the talk page. You shouldn't be surprised when people become impatient with you. Plutocow (talk) 03:13, 21 March 2021 (UTC)


Thank you for restoring my rights. I thought only mods could change them, I'm a bit curious as to how GC was able to do that.

I'm sorry for undoing your block on HBC, but he was reacting to GC not being entirely nice to me. I think what GC (and a few others) did in a thread in the saloon bar where I was talking to HBC was less civil. I'm fine with them, kind of conversation stoppers, but leave them be. I'm undecided on whether GC is going through a mental health crisis or not, and will likely adjust my opinion of him depending on the outcome. UninspiringNickname (talk) 02:59, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

GC lost his last remaining fuck and in the middle of a rage and depression spiral. But you don't have to believe that if you don't want to. Think happy thoughts and pretend GC is a liar! Then you can live in your fucking fantasy land in peace free from any evidence to the contrary! It works for Qanoners, it can work for you too! ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 03:05, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
(ec)You're welcome, any sysop can add/remove Sysop and Autopatrolled. HBC's assholery to someone that they knew was in a mental situation was bad and why I blocked them on top of having been warned for similar passiveaggressive behavior before. Such situations can trigger me as I have been in such situations in the past. In general, we should assume that they are going through a mental health crisis for now since the consequences of otherwise can be dangerous, but I hope everything just works out safely in the end. Plutocow (talk) 03:06, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
@GrammarCommie I disagree with you. I don't hate you. I have no idea where you got that from. But I've seen both kinds of situations. Go get yourself some sleep, please. Things always look better in the morning. UninspiringNickname (talk) 03:25, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

@Plutocow Oh, sorry, fat fingers when trying to look the contribs of that oddly-named User UninspiringNickname (talk) 15:42, 25 March 2021 (UTC)


I don't think your vandal binning is warranted. Can you please show me, with diff links, the vandalism? If not I'll will parole the user (BTW - getting in a shit fight on a talk-page does not constitute vandalism). Ace://about blank 03:28, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

I warned him on their talkpage that if they continued to engage in edit warring after their last ban that they would be vandal binned, and they completely ignored the warning. UShistoryanalyzer was told a ridiculous amount of times to stop with the constant edit warring and they never listened, so a long-term solution is warranted. See User talk:UShistoryanalyzer#Seriously. Plutocow (talk) 03:33, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
The only solution I can see besides binning would be a topic ban from US politics/history. Plutocow (talk) 03:36, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
Edit warring =/= vandal. You're going to have to justify it better than that... Ace://about blank 03:39, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
It's unclear whether UShistoryanalyzer is even a good faith user in the first place, given their complete refusal to listen to warnings and the fact that all of their edits are only there to push the Dixiecrat fallacy, but they were a problem user for a while now. Regardless, the vandal bin doesn't seem to be exclusively for vandals, we've put trolls there before. Still, the bin gives UShistoryanalyzer a chance to improve their behavior without allowing them to go on huge tantrums that result in them edit warring in multiple pages at once. Plutocow (talk) 03:44, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
Since you've opened a case against him on ATIM I believe he should be paroled for now, so he can at least defend himself. GeeJayK (talk) 04:28, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Ken socks[edit]

We've been banning these socks for days right now and I think I've seen a pattern that they usually (but not always follow): they create a blank page. Have you seen it? GeeJayK (talk) 04:47, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

I haven't seen it all that often, I can usually tell because they spam the same pages and usually talk about the decline of atheism or RationalWiki. Plutocow (talk) 04:51, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
Yeah, I've seen in at least a couple of times. I'd add talking to Ace on his talk page (which he doesn't seem to care) to the list. GeeJayK (talk) 04:52, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
I don't fucking care. If Ken wants to pleasure himself, discreetly and in a Jesus Loves Me manner, then he can have at my talkpage. Ace://about blank 05:33, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
Well, your page, your rules, but I really think you should do something more interesting than catering to that idiot. GeeJayK (talk) 05:41, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
He garners the least amount of attention from me. If he wants to post rambling screeds then so be it. But I predict 2021 WILL BE THE WORST YEAR FOR CHRISTIANITY! Operation Who gives a flying fuck is successful! Ace://about blank 06:13, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
Gentlemen, I do hate to do it, but on behalf of atheism I declare VICTORY! Ole! Ole! Pizza SLICE.gifChef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 06:33, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
If Ken needs Machismo training I can offer it at 100K (US Dollars - not our stupid girly NZ dollars). If Ken really had a sweetheart he wouldn't need to brag about it. I declare victory! As Sun Tzu was often quoted as saying... you're a fucking idiot. Ace://about blank 06:39, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
I'd say 2021 is probably going to be better than 2022. Every year from now on will be the worst year for Christianity, until Christianity is no more. GeeJayK (talk) 13:38, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
I will point out that lots of new users create blank user pages. That is not necessarily a sign of anything. 13:43, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Deleted drafts[edit]

Have we decided anything on that matter? GeeJayK (talk) 06:44, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

He's topic banned so he won't be able to edit the drafts, and thus nobody was going to improve them, and all were low quality anyway and only served to push the Dixiecrat fallacy. There's no real reason to keep them. Plutocow (talk) 06:49, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
That's not what I've asked you. I don't think we can just delete them solely on our opinons on them. We have procedures after all and there's nothing about it on the topic ban description. It might be the correct thing to delete them? It's very possible. But we don't have this right. I think you should at least post on the ATIM thread before making these monocratic decisions. GeeJayK (talk) 06:55, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
Pages created by a user that is not in good standing are fair game to delete. If anyone wanted to dispute these deletions, they could bring it up with me, but if your problem is with the procedures and not the deletion then we have nothing to discuss. Plutocow (talk) 06:57, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
Again, according to who are they a fair game to delete? Maybe I've been working for the feds for so long, but I don't see how procedures can be arbitrarily ignored just because we believe there's a faster way. . GeeJayK (talk) 07:01, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
If anyone had a problem with the deletion, they could bring it to me. Anyone could have undeleted them but no one did. There is no need to get upset with this if you're not going to dispute the deletion. Plutocow (talk) 07:03, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
Well, I'm actually inclined to undelete them, but I don't like revert decisions of other users who have the same rights as I do. I didn't read them, but I remmeber Bongolian saying some of them are decent. GeeJayK (talk) 07:10, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
Maybe you shouldn't speak authoritatively on pages you didn't even read. It's similar to you defending UShistoryanalyzer when you admit you didn't read through his edits. Please try to understand a situation before commenting. Plutocow (talk) 07:15, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
Plus, people like Flandres and Christopher had already deleted crappy drafts without going through AfDs before. Plutocow (talk) 07:20, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
(EC) I don't think I need to read them to say that we didn't decide anything about it. The problem is not the content nor the user, is procedure, which is something I believe in and live by, and I don't think we can just delete things based on our opinions, we have rules for that. Otherwise we have arbitrariness. I defended you on Scrooge's page a few hours ago, but right now fascism accusations aside you're doing just what he accused you to do. I'll ping @Christopher here as I believe he also thinks things should be done by the book. GeeJayK (talk) 07:24, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
Would you mind posting these? I'll see them when I have time. GeeJayK (talk) 07:25, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
We shouldn't need to be so bureaucratic that we need to go through procedure to do every damn little thing, like removing drafts posted by a problematic user who was topic banned from the subject that the drafts are posted in. Also Christopher has deleted drafts before without going through procedures, are you gonna call him a fascist as well? Plutocow (talk) 07:35, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
First. Maybe I wasn't clear enough, I said you aren't a fascist. I never call people that, unless they're actually fascists, because when you use this word a lot people stop caring and vote for fascists (I've seen this happening where I live). I said that I consider your decision was arbitrary. Second, in my opinion, yes I think we should go through procedures. But that's my opinion, others might disagree. Christopher will probably answer in a few hours, I have to sleep. Let's see his opinion. GeeJayK (talk) 07:41, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

β”Œβ”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”˜I say restore them all for now, nominate the best one for deletion and ask people to vote on whether they should all go. I’m careful to only delete hopelessly tiny stubs or pages that were only ever worked on by sysops (so they could easily restore them if they wanted to start working again). Christopher (talk) 08:04, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Good enough for me. GeeJayK (talk) 15:11, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
Supposing we're doing this, how are we going to choose the best of them? Let him decide? Or would you like to decide by yourself? GeeJayK (talk) 17:22, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
I’m not sure, personally I’d nominate one or two. Should probably ping @UShistoryanalyzer and get his input, I imagine most people would let any technical violations of the Iban that happen during the process slide. Christopher (talk) 17:26, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for pinging me. It was utterly ridiculous that Plutocow outright deleted them just because he thinks I'm pushing some fallacy when I make good points backed up by sufficient sources. Unfortunately Plutocow has exhibited a high level of cognitive dissonance and intolerance. UShistoryanalyzer (talk) 17:33, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
Please, let's stay on topic. GeeJayK (talk) 17:37, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
Here's the thing: Plutocow made sure all my page creations would be in the draftspace so they could mass-delete them simply because they doesn't like the factual points I'm making. The info in my page creations were accurate and correct. Plutocow doesn't care about facts. I spent a good deal of time working on them to add onto RW's category for past U.S. political figures, but Plutocow doesn't care. UShistoryanalyzer (talk) 17:43, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
Plutocow has put personal derangement over truth. The facts speak for themselves. I was 100% correct to say that Rumsfeld held a pro-civil rights tenure as a member of Congress, but Plutocow point-blank reverted. UShistoryanalyzer (talk) 17:46, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Yo, smooth brain[edit]

Remember that totally-a-ban-evading-sock-of-Ken you b& and then burned the evidence when it give you a sweary earful on its talk page for being such a dumb fuck? The one that you then re-b& with talk page access blocked?

Yeah, that was me. I suggest you take you and your idiot wikicop spidey senses on a nice long lurk moar leave of absence while I try & rediscover my previous goodwill re. you retaining any kind of blocking rights. A few weeks should do it. Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 11:09, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

At the end of the day it doesn’t really matter if a β€œban evading” account slips through the cracks, it’ll be abandoned in a day or two at most either way. Failing to consider the real impact of a block (often almost nothing) and instead blocking because you believe the account β€œdeserves” it is an attitude far too many people on here have. Christopher (talk) 11:39, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
Meh. If one does stupid troll-y shit like that (create a few new accounts just to post completely stupid comments on the Salon Bar and even being bored enough to reply to your own sock), one might easily be mistaken for the stench of a certain banned troll known for creating new accounts and posting completely stupid comments on the Salon Bar, as also happened in that thread. It's kind of Poe's Law-ish in a way. Plutocow wasn't the only user that thought your accounts were a certain banned user. PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 12:42, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
Yeah I don’t think the banning of an account made with the goal of getting banned is an issue, but Plutocow has banned innocent users in the past. Christopher (talk) 12:52, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

@PanGalacticGargleBlaster I never cease to be amazed by people's eagerness to comment trumping their (presumable) desire not to come across like a lazy fucking moron who hasn't bothered to look at any of the available evidence. Most immediately, from the restored Fullest Nelson talk page: "Your "superior" pattern recognition skills have blocked a blindingly obvious joke sock created in response to the Full / Fuller Nelson accounts." And if you can look at these contribs and see Ken DeFucking Myer, then your brain must have achieved a smoothness hitherto unknown to medical science.

Please feel free to continue humiliating yourself in public, or - and hear me out here - try something along the lines of "Yeah, totally dived in here without reading or thinking, and I'll endeavour to stop doing dumb shit like that." Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 13:22, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, if you're gonna impersonate a suspicious user, don't be surprised when you are mistaken for being that user. Speaking of which, aren't impersonating usernames banned anyway? Plutocow (talk) 13:41, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
Wiki break. Take one. It's a good deal. Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 13:54, 24 June 2021 (UTC)


Thank you for unblocking me, if you did. Don't worry, I'm definantly here to contribute. Da Wyyzrd Ohai


I believe that only the first letter of a search is case insensitive. Scream!! (talk) 22:27, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

No, they all are. Try it for yourself. Plutocow (talk) 00:10, 11 July 2021 (UTC)


For the misgendering. It wasn't intentional. Techpriest (talk) 11:38, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Sherri Tenpenny[edit]

I just saw your edit about Tenpenny being one of the β€œdisinformation dozen”, which, for me, drives home the importance of improving this article. Are you considering doing more work on this article? If so, I’d be happy to collaborate. I’m currently checking out what Snopes have on her, hereβ€”Snopes: debunking & fact-checking Sherri Tenpenny . LeucippusJodie Foster made me do it! 00:20, 27 July 2021 (UTC)