User talk:Ocatecir: Difference between revisions

I appreciate your denying the IP User:71.112.115.55's request for an unblock. I have been on Wikipedia for a year, and I have never seen one user so determined to vandalize and troll. I am building a lengthy case against this person's six month history of disruption to Wikipedia here, and it's a lengthy process. I'm only up to April 1st. Anyway, thank you for taking the time to review their history; it would be great if people like you and I could spend time like this making substantive edits. I think ArbCom, upon seeing the jaw-dropping amount of evidence, will ban this user. --David Shankbone 04:02, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:The Black Wall Street......see The Black Wall Street Records. The user is currently subject of an AN/I discussion for vandalism on Curtis (50 Cent album). 50 Cent's label is rivals with The Black Wall Street Records. Per policy, users cannot have usernames that reflect a company or organization. Request you reinstate the block. ⇒ SWATJester ^{Denny Crane.} 04:56, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, shows you how much I know about rap in the new millenium (I'm all about anything before 1997). Block reinstated. Sorry about that. —Ocatecir ^Talk 05:30, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heh. The only reason I know this, is because I came across it on randompage patrol, and was going to AFD it when I found out it actually is semi-notable. ⇒ SWATJester ^{Denny Crane.} 06:44, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Eastmain left the following message on the Law enforcement wikiproject:

Do you happen to recall what references he left? I'm assuming he either added them too late for you to see them before you deleted it, or they weren't suitable for wikipedia? It would be in the aims of the project to recreate the article with proper references, please see Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority Police. Cheers! SGGH ^speak! 14:30, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I don't intend to overturn your deletion, however with the above main website as a new source I was planning to write the article again, using the police force's website as a source to avoid a similar deletion. Do I just restore the original and re-write it or write the whole thing again? SGGH ^speak! 20:24, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Probably a good job you caught that one before I did :) Nice one, Deiz talk 05:58, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of which, how do you feel about the trivial reference to being the "first American research university opened in the 21st century" in the intro at UC Merced? Mind you, if the various comments made by the anon are a testament to the character of UCM students / grads / whoever then they can have as much useless trivia in their article as they wish. Deiz talk 06:02, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'm over it... again, nice work on despammifying my TP and taking action as required. Deiz talk 10:37, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The fun and games continue at UCM. Deiz talk 15:28, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've posted an update and more on the RFC there. I'm just letting you know since you were involved. If you don't want any part of this anymore it is understandable after what happened last time. Optigan13

Please explain _why_ you allow external links to be deleted for UC Merced, but you restore external links to UCLA, UC Irvine, etc. Why don't you restore the external links for UC Merced, to be consistent? Why is the UC Merced article being held to a different standard? Please give a clear explanation. Don't block, threaten to block, or use acronyms that don't answer the question. Again, why is the UC Merced article being held to a different standard? Why don't you restore the external links for UC Merced? These are serious questions, please give a real answer!

169.236.22.20 04:30, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ocatecir was reverting a violation of WP:POINT. Acronyms are links to policy and guideline pages, the full title of WP:POINT being Wikipedia:Don't disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point, click through to find the answers. Very simply, there are ways to do things and ways not to do things. Deiz talk 05:24, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Let me ask the question again. Why was it okay for Deiz to delete external links from the UC Merced article, when the other campus articles are filled with external links? I would like to hear an explanation from Ocatecir. Why is the UC Merced article being held to a different standard? Again, please give an answer, an explanation, not a block, a threatened block, or a link to some other page, but an explanation. (A block is not an explanation, a link is not an explanation.) Why are external links not allowed on the UC Merced page when other campus articles are filled with external links?

169.236.22.26 05:33, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Experienced editors often link to policies and guidelines to save having to duplicate their contents. Edits made in good faith to cleanup articles and bring them in line with standards are welcome from any editor. Violations of WP:POINT, regardless of what they add or remove, are unconstructive and unwelcome and will be reverted. Here's an idea: read WP:EL and try editing one of the other UC articles, leaving an appropriate edit summary and a note on the talk page about what you did and why - if you can demonstrate that you're doing things for the right reasons then we'll be getting somewhere, and I'll certainly have your back if anyone has the same kind of concerns we've seen from you and others in recent days. Deiz talk 05:47, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to hear an explanation from Ocatecir. Deiz is just repeatedly saying read WP:EL. I have read that repeatedly, but I still don't have an explanation. The other campus articles had external links and these were deleted, with an edit summary in terms of WP:EL and that information on the talk page. Yet Ocatecir restored these external links. I would like to hear an explanation from Ocatecir. (Note: saying read WP:EL again is not an explanation) 169.236.22.11 05:55, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, given your inability to grasp the WP:POINT issue and indeed any of what has patiently been explained to you several times by two administrators, I'm pretty well resigned to the fact that you aren't going to get it anytime soon. Maybe Ocatecir will have better luck. Deiz talk 06:09, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Let's not get personal here. I'm pretty well resigned to the fact that you won't give a clear explanation. I would like to hear an explanation from Ocatecir, of why UC Merced external links were deleted when other campus articles are filled with external links. Again, I am asking Ocatecir.

169.236.22.22 06:16, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The simple explanation is that you went on a tear deleting valid external links and even internal links. Your edits amounted to pure vandalism to prove a point. Your deletion of valid internal and external links shows that you have no interest in learning how things are done here. Because you fail to grasp policy despite MULTIPLE warnings, because your IP changes every time you edit, and because of your general demeanor I have blocked your entire IP range for 1 week. Any attempt to get around this block will result in the block being reset and that ip blocked as well. Take this time to look around, see how things are done. Given that I've blocked you in the past for short periods and you have decided not to heed my warnings and continue editing under different IPs, hopefully a more heavy handed approach will get results. If you decide you want to edit here after the block is lifted, I highly recommend creating an account. —Ocatecir ^Talk 16:36, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You wanted Ocatecir... And you got him! :) Deiz talk 11:09, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

{{editprotected}}

Hi, could you check out this page:http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DreamGuy&oldid=137937852#Frank_Carney Is he allowed to delete all comments? I know Wikipedia:Talk_page_guidelines#Others.27_comments says "you may remove comments from others,", but Wikipedia:Talk_page_guidelines#Own_comments says "use strike-through or a place holder to show it is a retrospective alteration" so it seems you can't delete your own comments. Anyway, he deleted the entire section after I accused him of a personal attack. Thanks for looking into this.Tstrobaugh 19:30, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While deleting talk page comments to hide something is frowned upon, any user may delete comments from his or her talk page without repercussion. The edits are still in the history so they can be still used for reference if they are out line. —Ocatecir ^Talk 19:42, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your support in my recent, unsuccessful RfA. It's much appreciated. IvoShandor 16:22, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. See you at the next one in a few months :) - Ocatecir^Talk 16:31, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, fine. sorry for the trouble. Like you said if he doesn't want to argue there's no point in it. I just wanted him to stop taking cheap shots. I also want to point out that I was "civil", if tenacious.Tstrobaugh 16:34, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to point out that DreamGuy is continuing the argument:" I told the person not to bother posting here... he's just a clueless harassing problem editor, banned from my tlak page)" but I won't respond.Tstrobaugh 16:05, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Best not to respond. Be the bigger person. If he does anything else beyond that let me know. — Ocatecir^T 16:12, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:DreamGuy has started an edit war with me at High_IQ_society. I don't say he's wikistalking me yet, because this is the only page that we have both edited, but I have edited in this category extensively.Tstrobaugh 18:17, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is an example of someone who definitely should not be complaining about *pther people's* alleged wrongdoing, because at this point he should probably be blocked for his nonsense. DreamGuy 18:45, 20 June 2007 (UTC) And, as a further point, the guy certainly has no grounds to claim wikistalking, as I showed up and removed some links, as I often do to lots of articles, completely independent of anything he had done, and *he* was the one who blind reverted me. DreamGuy 18:47, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• You suggest an WP:RFC. An RFC says the first step is to try an communicate with other party on their talk page. I did that [here] and User:DreamGuy just deleted it without answering. I would like the link put back in High IQ society as DreamGuy did the last revert. There is also a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#DreamGuy_edit_wars_further. Thanks for any input.Tstrobaugh 18:58, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just saw that a user RFC on Dreamguy was done in July 2005 Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/DreamGuy-2, looks like nothing has changed. He must be connected or something.Tstrobaugh 14:32, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually there is quite a history of Dreamguy's misdeeds:

• User:Vashti/DreamGuy
• Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/DreamGuy
• Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbitration/DreamGuy
• Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/DreamGuy
• Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/DreamGuy
• Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/DreamGuy-2
• Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/DreamGuy/Statement
• Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/DreamGuy
• Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/DreamGuy/Workshop
• Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/DreamGuy/Evidence
• Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/DreamGuy/Proposed_decision
• Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive110#DreamGuy:_Case_of_multiple_3RR.2FSockpuppet.2FPA_abuse
• Category:Suspected_Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_DreamGuy
• Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2006-01-10_Chimera
• Wikipedia_talk:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2006-01-10_Chimera
• Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/1_01_2006_Skull_(symbolism)
• Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/JoshuaSchroeder
• [1]
• Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Gabrielsimon/Evidence
• Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive233#Spontaneous_block_of_DreamGuy_by_David_Gerard.2C_please_review
• Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive70#DreamGuy
• User_talk:ScienceApologist/Archive_1#Words_of_support

Tstrobaugh 16:45, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I saw the ANI about Dreamguy, I'm not sure what you want me to do about it. It looks like other admins are handling it (check his block log). — Ocatecir^T 16:49, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what you can do about it either, you said above:"If he does anything else beyond that let me know." So that's what I did.Tstrobaugh 17:15, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...is doing the removing college ext. links WP:POINT thing. I inadvertently started this thing and love the way you're handling it so anything you see fit would be fine by me :) Deiz talk 14:48, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

::sigh::. This guy is tenacious. Too bad it isn't for anything productive. Dealt with accordingly. — Ocatecir^T 15:06, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

01:37, 2 June 2007 Ocatecir deleted "Nade Computers" (Speedy deleted per (CSD a7), was an article about a company or corporation that didn't assert the importance or significance of its subject.. using TW)

I don't understand why you deleted a perfectly legitimate business's page. Who are you to determine the significance of a business and what material did you use to justify beliving that it was insignificant? As far as I can tell this deletion was done for no substantial or logical reason.

Additionally the page for Nade Computers was extremely similar to many other company's pages including Voodoo PC Does their page not assert importance or significance? I look forward to your lack of supporting evidence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sh4fton (talk • contribs)

• Responded on user's talk page. — Ocatecir^T 23:20, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thought I'd rolled back the edits on Chad but obviously not.. nice work as always.. Deiz talk 06:09, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to look at the unblock request above. SGGH ^speak! 19:07, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another editor already addressed it, thanks though. — Ocatecir^T 19:23, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you added "Lists of films with features in common|Disabled protagonists" to Scent of a Woman. You may know more about this than I do, but clicking on the category link takes you to simply "Lists of films with features in common" because there is no category for disabled protagonists. It doesn't seem to make sense. The page for "Lists of films with features in common" contains many films with disabled protagonists, but also links to other lists that have nothing to do with disability. Take a look. I'm baffled. Do you understand it? Ward3001 01:15, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oops. I am going to go through now and replace that with [[Category:Lists of films with disabled protagonists]]. Thanks for the heads up. — Ocatecir^T 01:23, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to ask you for assistance in Template:World War II reverts. User:Dojarca is removing links to some content related to darker part of the history of the Soviet Union - Occupation of Baltic states and Winter War. He also denies that Soviet Union was German ally between 1939 and 1941 what is certainly against historical events like Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact or Invasion of Poland (1939). I'm unable to make more reverts due to Wikipedia:Three-revert rule and I don't want edit war there. Could you be so kind and look on recent changes for making your own opinion? Regards, Piotr Mikołajski 14:16, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]