User talk:Guccisamsclubs

Stalking

In looking at your editing history, it is absolutely evident that you are WP:HOUNDing user My very best wishes. Please be aware of the fact that it is unacceptable behaviour. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 01:02, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies. Having looked at other contributions by you via your other user account and IP, your interests cover similar areas, but there's no indication of the pattern I made a bad faith assumption about. You do, however, need to make certain that the accounts you use are officially related. As for your IP edits, you might want to list the articles you worked on both user pages as an indication of your interests and activities for the edification of other editors. There's no need to identify your IP account if you'd prefer not to disclose your whereabouts (another good reason to always remember to log in!). Cheers! --Iryna Harpy (talk) 06:19, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Iryna, you were right. He/she self-admittedly follows my edits on multiple pages [1]. That would be fine, but they always revert my edits or at least object to them. So, I think it would be a good if they stop doing this. My very best wishes (talk) 22:12, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please, like you've never looked at someone's (contribs)? Mentioning a source that does not square with your edits on ONE talk page is not stalking. If I find an interesting source, I am not gonna refrain from posting it on a talk page just because I've seen your edits. And it is just one case, cause none of my other contributions had anything to do with you. The only pattern I'm seeing here is one of ridiculous personal attacks: insinuating COI, sockpuppetry, a pattern of unconstructive editing and now hounding etc. Guccisamsclubs (talk) 23:49, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In the diff above [2] you said that you are not familiar with the subject and would like to leave this page alone. Nevertheless, you reverted later on the very same page with the following justification (edit summary): "at this point, the two of you are essentially harassing ...". This is also an WP:NPA violation by you. My very best wishes (talk) 04:43, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't care. Guccisamsclubs (talk) 10:11, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:Guccisamsclub

Are you the same as this editor? If so, you might want to read WP:RENAME. Kingsindian ♝ ♚ 01:30, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also, if you want to preserve an alternative account (say for editing from a public computer), see WP:VALIDALT. For instance, your userpage for this account identifies the other account, but the other userpage doesn't do the same for this one. Might be good to fix this. Kingsindian ♝ ♚ 05:39, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:Archgetty

Tell me please, do you have any real life connection to User:Archgetty? I am asking per WP:COI. Also, did you edit using other accounts, in addition to alternative account noted above? Thanks, My very best wishes (talk) 04:19, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Of course not, that's absurd. Why do you?Guccisamsclubs (talk) 10:31, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

3RR report

Please see here My very best wishes (talk) 20:10, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Re

To this and this. What counts is not words, but actions. The issue is not that you follow my edits on a number of pages, but that you follow me to revert my edits, oppose to them or vote in an opposite way. Why? Is it work to improve content, or to create inconvenience for another user by reverting reasonable edits he does? Whatever this might be, it would be the best if you simply did not follow my edits. OK? Thanks, My very best wishes (talk) 21:35, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The fact of the matter is that these pages are on my watchlist or places I check frequently when logged out. I only got to Florensky by looking at your contribs. Half the time—you are reverting content that I put in. If I find a lot of your edits to be crap, it does not mean I am stalking you. For you to be accusing others of stalking is an act of astounding hypocrisy. I have no further interest in discussing this with you. If you feel I am following your edits, go ahead an assume that—it might make you think twice about doing an unconstructive edit. Guccisamsclubs (talk) 22:02, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As should be clear from my comment above, I did NOT accuse you of wikihounding at this point. I only said that you watch and follow my edits, which is a perfectly legitimate practice if this is done to improve the content. My very best wishes (talk) 22:10, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And as I pointed out to you that assumption is invalid. I did not arrive at either of those articles by looking at your contribs. Guccisamsclubs (talk) 21:32, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I beg your pardon. You followed my edits here, here, here, here, here and possibly here. I simply do not consider this to be a big issue. My very best wishes (talk) 02:16, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to respond to each one, so I'll take the first one. I the article caught my attention after some pov-pusher kept vandalizing Black Book of Communism by smearing Getty as a "stalin apologist", not a "real historian" etc. The rest are approximately as ludicrous as the first. Anyway, I should probably heed my own advice and not entertain your concerns on this issue further.Guccisamsclubs (talk) 08:14, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think you mostly tried to exaggerate non-notable negative statements about the book. And here you remove something different and well-sourced about Getty. Did you actually read any books by Getty and like them? My very best wishes (talk) 13:46, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Using multiple accounts

You should not revert on the same page using multiple accounts [3], even if it is immediately obvious that both accounts belong to the same user. Thanks, My very best wishes (talk) 19:13, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I only have one account at my disposal right now and that's the primary one.Guccisamsclub (talk) 20:06, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Do you agree not to use several accounts on the same page? My very best wishes (talk) 21:07, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be happy to use the one ending in "s", but I've locked myself out of it. I'll continue to edit the article with the main account name, which means some of your edits may be challenged. Nobody likes their edits being challenged, but that's life. Guccisamsclub (talk) 21:31, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]