Maybe she'll give you a Lewinsky, after you wipe your santorum off her ass Options

[Tarc]

So, here we go. A "new user" (herp derp) User:Kiwi Bomb (T-H-L-K-D) whips out a perfectly-wikified, abundantly-cited "Lewinsky (neologism)" page, adds it to a list of eponyms, the Monica Lewinsky articles, and somehow manages to find the recently contentious sexual neologism template. That "new user" sure knows his way around, eh?

Article deleted, Kiwi is blocked, SPI turns up nothing, unfortunately. The unblock request;

I have been unilaterally blocked for what appear to be political reasons. There is nothing wrong with the article I created or the sources I used. Please unblock me. Thank you.

is a bit too polished and measured, IMO. If I were really a new editor who logged in the same day as account creation and found myself blocke,d I tihkn my responses would be tinged with more "WTF is going on?" incredulity.

So what do we have here? Someone with a Monica hang-up, or just a hard-on for public figure neologisms? Another Dan Savage-like move to cut down someone who almost brought down a Democratic president?

The DRV at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2011 July 2 (T-H-L-K-D) is chugging along right now

[Michaeldsuarez]

SPI turns up nothing, unfortunately.

Why is it unfortunate? Are you upset that the evidence doesn't support your assumptions? And now everyone is falling back on WP:DUCK as the means to keep the block enforced. There wasn't any warning; there was only a knee-jerking reflex from a trigger-happy Dreadstar.

I don't support the article, but I do support due process. The article has a right to due process (AfD), Kiwi Bomb has a right to due process (blocking based on evidence) as well. Community consensus wasn't sought, and Kiwi Bomb was banned without a second's thought.

[Milton Roe]

SPI turns up nothing, unfortunately.

Why is it unfortunate? Are you upset that the evidence doesn't support your assumptions? And now everyone is falling back on WP:DUCK as the means to keep the block enforced. There wasn't any warning; there was only a knee-jerking reflex from a trigger-happy Dreadstar.

I don't support the article, but I do support due process. The article has a right to due process (AfD), Kiwi Bomb has a right to due process (blocking based on evidence) as well. Community consensus wasn't sought, and Kiwi Bomb was banned without a second's thought.

The SPI turned up nothing and being a single purpose account is not a reason for blocking. The only problem this user made was in making an article that, while I would err on the side of deletion for it, was certainly not an attack page of any sort. What exactly was this user blocked for? [[User:Silver seren|Silver 03:39, 3 July 2011 (UTC)]]

I didn't make the block, but if I did, it would have been for violations of [[WP:SOCK]] and [[WP:POINT]]. [[User:NuclearWarfare|NW]] 03:42, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Who is Kiwi Bomb a sock of? If you can tell me that, then I will gladly leave this alone. And creating an article is not a violation of [[WP:POINT]]. [[User:Silver seren|Silver]] 03:43, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Apparently it's a violation of WP:POINT if some dumbass admin has a sufficiently thin skin, and decides to take it that way. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/hmmm.gif)

Not that WP:POINT is a very good policy anyway. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/hrmph.gif)

Boy, you know WR has been doing its work when these guys see satire in absolutely everything, and ban the hell out of every newb who looks like they're wielding it.

WP's getting to look like Nixon and Kent State these days.

[carbuncle]

I suspect Cirt. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wink.gif)

[EricBarbour]

I suspect Cirt. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wink.gif)

I BLAME SOCIETY!!! (blah)

[Ron Ritzman]

SPI turns up nothing, unfortunately.

Why is it unfortunate? Are you upset that the evidence doesn't support your assumptions? And now everyone is falling back on WP:DUCK as the means to keep the block enforced. There wasn't any warning; there was only a knee-jerking reflex from a trigger-happy Dreadstar.

I don't support the article, but I do support due process. The article has a right to due process (AfD), Kiwi Bomb has a right to due process (blocking based on evidence) as well. Community consensus wasn't sought, and Kiwi Bomb was banned without a second's thought.

I haven't commented on this over "there" but "here" I'll give my opinion on this. I don't think he's a "sock" in the classic sense (he may have another account but it's probably not involved in the santorum mess) and I don't think he's trying to make a "WP:POINT". I think his "newness but obvious experience", the timing, and the subject, were all designed to create the drama that it did. In other words, he did it for the "lulz".

[Milton Roe]

SPI turns up nothing, unfortunately.

Why is it unfortunate? Are you upset that the evidence doesn't support your assumptions? And now everyone is falling back on WP:DUCK as the means to keep the block enforced. There wasn't any warning; there was only a knee-jerking reflex from a trigger-happy Dreadstar.

I don't support the article, but I do support due process. The article has a right to due process (AfD), Kiwi Bomb has a right to due process (blocking based on evidence) as well. Community consensus wasn't sought, and Kiwi Bomb was banned without a second's thought.

I haven't commented on this over "there" but "here" I'll give my opinion on this. I don't think he's a "sock" in the classic sense (he may have another account but it's probably not involved in the santorum mess) and I don't think he's trying to make a "WP:POINT". I think his "newness but obvious experience", the timing, and the subject, were all designed to create the drama that it did. In other words, he did it for the "lulz".

Well then, a new policy is needed: WP:NOLULZ

[Herschelkrustofsky]

And now everyone is falling back on WP:DUCK as the means to keep the block enforced. There wasn't any warning; there was only a knee-jerking reflex from a trigger-happy Dreadstar.

Nothing out of the ordinary here.

[Ron Ritzman]

Well then, a new policy is needed: WP:NOLULZ

Well, we do have WP:DENY which is all but undoable in reality. The only way this guy wouldn't have got what he wanted was for either "a" the Lewinsky (neologism) page gets completely ignored or "b" the article gets immediately deleted, he gets blocked without talk page access, and nobody comments. Both were unlikely.

This post has been edited by Ron Ritzman:

[Zoloft]

Perhaps I should write WP:SRSBZNS

Complete with lolcat pic.

[Milton Roe]

Perhaps I should write WP:SRSBZNS

Complete with lolcat pic.

Which we have already:

WP:SRSBZNS

(IMG:http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/ll191/Shrlocc/CeilingJimbo.jpg)

[NuclearWarfare]

Perhaps I should write WP:SRSBZNS

Complete with lolcat pic.

Which we have already:

WP:SRSBZNS

(IMG:http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/ll191/Shrlocc/CeilingJimbo.jpg)

Would be more effective with the creepy-as-hell peeking Jimbo:

(IMG:http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6c/Jimbo_Peeking.gif)

[Silver seren]

Well, block is overturned now.

I helped. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/evilgrin.gif)

[melloden]

Well, block is overturned now.

I helped. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/evilgrin.gif)

It seemed like a sock to me.

[Tarc]

SPI turns up nothing, unfortunately.

Why is it unfortunate? Are you upset that the evidence doesn't support your assumptions?

As I told you over there, I go with the gut. Kiwi is a good/clever sock, I'll give him that, but if you really think it is a "new" editor, you're pretty dense.

Same goes for User:Gacurr (T-H-L-K-D).

[carbuncle]

SPI turns up nothing, unfortunately.

Why is it unfortunate? Are you upset that the evidence doesn't support your assumptions?

As I told you over there, I go with the gut. Kiwi is a good/clever sock, I'll give him that, but if you really think it is a "new" editor, you're pretty dense.

Same goes for User:Gacurr (T-H-L-K-D).

I think Gacurr is probably Benjiboi, but I could be wrong.

[Silver seren]

Coren says that he just blocked Gacurr's numerous other accounts, so...

Presumably, he didn't come up with any known sockmaster, he just found a bunch of tied together accounts, which is why he's asking the question on Gacurr's talk page.

[RMHED]

Coren says that he just blocked Gacurr's numerous other accounts, so...

Presumably, he didn't come up with any known sockmaster, he just found a bunch of tied together accounts, which is why he's asking the question on Gacurr's talk page.

Coren is a stupid cunt, if he were any more stupid he'd be Fred Bauder.

[melloden]

SPI turns up nothing, unfortunately.

Why is it unfortunate? Are you upset that the evidence doesn't support your assumptions?

As I told you over there, I go with the gut. Kiwi is a good/clever sock, I'll give him that, but if you really think it is a "new" editor, you're pretty dense.

Same goes for User:Gacurr (T-H-L-K-D).

A good or clever sock, however, would not have used such sophisticated edit summaries within in the first few edits, as Kiwi had. I'm not sure why most socks don't understand that. I mean, unless you are expecting to only use the account for a week or so before abandoning it, then at least make a better attempt at disguising your experience.

[Tarc]

I think Gacurr is probably Benjiboi, but I could be wrong.

My thought as well, when some clod gave me a "tsk tsk, don't bite the newbies" warning after I got on Gacurr's case a few weeks ago.