Wikipedia:Account suspensions/Boothy443

User:Boothy443

19:35, 23 August 2005 Jimbo Wales blocked Boothy443 (talk · contribs · block log) with an expiry time of 17 seconds (annoying gay porn link that embarassed me)

I blocked Boothy443 for having a very offensive link on one of his user pages. This caused me a fair amount of embarassment as I clicked on it in a work environment. I have no idea what the policy is, so I only blocked him for 17 seconds. But I think admins should hold themselves to a high standard of professionalism.--Jimbo Wales 19:59, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"A professional works to receive payment for an activity." Boothy443 isn't acting appropriate for his pay grade of nuthin' per hour? 17 seconds? This is dry humor, right? 4.250.168.27 18:58, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If you're curious about what the link is, it's Last Measure. --SPUI (talk) 21:02, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, wait a bit... Admin? This is the second person I've seen claiming Boothy443 is an admin, and yet he's not on WP:LA. What's going on? --cesarb 23:25, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

He isn't. Compare [1] to e.g. [2]. Pak aran 18:16, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Any reason not to block him for a month or so? He's been trolling and disrupting Wikipedia for a long time now. — Dan | Talk 06:35, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No objections from me. Jtkiefer ^{T | @ | C} ----- 06:40, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

Object. Take him to the ArbCom if you believe he's such a problem. As far as I know he does a lot of good work; I remember seeing him doing RC patrol quite a bit. Everyking 07:00, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: agree with Everyking's comments. --tomf688^<TALK> 16:54, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

I have no objection, but from what Jimbo said on User talk:Boothy443 today, it sounds like he's at risk of the wrath of Jimbo. Anyway, it is really really really uncool to use edit summaries to insult Jimbo.

< jwales> rv/vabdalism by the hippocrate cult of Jimmy Wales

--Phroziac ^(talk) 16:59, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom would be fine. I've heard his name pop up more than one time in the past, so maybe ArbCom would be able to handle this appropriately. Linuxbeak | Talk | Desk 20:44, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

Er, Wikipedia is not censored. If you are browsing Wikipedia at work, aren't you accepting this kind of risk? --Ryan Delaney ^talk 23:42, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]