User talk:LarryTr7

Welcome!

Hello, LarryTr7, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! I am One of Many (talk) 09:02, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/漂流瓶- A Memoir by Ping Fu.
To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the reviewer's talk page. Please remember to link to the submission!
You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Puffin ^{Let's talk!} 16:59, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Continued violations of the rules regarding living people will result is this account being blocked too

This is your last warning. The next time you violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy by inserting unsourced or poorly sourced defamatory or otherwise controversial content into an article or any other Wikipedia page, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 04:31, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

March 2013

Please do not create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage their subject. Attack pages and files are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who create or add such material may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you. VanHarrisArt (talk) 08:13, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Policy on multiple accounts

Hello, LarryTr7, welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. Your editing pattern indicates that you may be using multiple accounts or coordinating editing with people outside Wikipedia. Our policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow this. If you operate multiple accounts directly or with the help of another person, please remember to disclose these connections. Yworo (talk) 08:29, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Yworo (talk) 23:55, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry

This account has been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks for sock puppetry per evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/LarryTr7. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not. Once the block has expired, you're welcome to make useful contributions. If you believe that this block was in error, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Someguy1221 (talk) 03:23, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 14:19, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

BLP policy

Please see biography of living persons. NE Ent 19:29, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

BLP violation

I've removed your BLP violation[1]. This seems to be an ongoing problem with you, based on previous comments. If you commit another BLP violation, you will be banned from discussing BLP material here under WP:BLPBAN and/or indef blocked. This is your final warning. Dennis Brown - 2¢ - © - @ - Join WER 11:19, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That contribution is a BLP violation why? The article has RS indicating Ping Fu has made false statements [Ping_Fu#Memoir]. While I'm not quite getting the intent of LarryTr7 posting the set of links they did, it's hard to see them as BLP violation. NE Ent 11:24, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The links aren't the issue, it's the text they included with it that is, I believe. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 11:27, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly people here are mixing up BLP violation with negative comments. Even reliable sources of information do not matter any more. What has this page become! LarryTr7 (talk) 02:29, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't doubt your sincerity, and you are providing diffs which is helpful and I hope they will discuss it with you. Honestly, it is a lot easier to do so the way you presented your last info, just facts and sources without making claims, in a professional manner. Thank you. When dealing with BLPs, living humans, we are always going to be exceedingly careful about what is and isn't acceptable. My comments about your tone shouldn't be seen as questioning the validity of your information. Dennis Brown - 2¢ - © - @ - Join WER 03:06, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comment. Look at posts from Fearofreprisal, one would not think those right, either. But nobody seems to care. 72.129.97.212 (talk) 05:52, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Larry, you've previously been blocked for sockpuppetry, so I strongly suggest you ensure you're logged in before making an edit. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 12:23, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Larry, I feel like you aren't paying attention. This edit had two problems, a BLP violation, and you attemtped to use a letter to the editor as a source for another fact. I would think you've been warned sufficiently on these points, and I'm not likely to keep warning. NE Ent has asked for more patience, but I'm running out. Dennis Brown / 2¢ / © / @ / Join WER 22:52, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What BLP violation, and a more careful review of the link is in order -- none of the letters reference Ping Fu: the link contains the following:

Corrections

The December cover story on Ping Fu, founder of software company Geomagic, overstated the company's revenue when it cited a figure of $30 million. The source for the figure, a member of the company's board of directors, was offering an opinion about Geomagic's long-term potential. Geomagic has declined to give an accurate revenue figure for 2005 but acknowledges that its revenue was significantly lower than the figure printed in Inc. Additionally, the undergraduate degree Ping earned in China was in literature, not English as a second language.

The edit was (in my opinion) properly reverted as undue, not a blp violation. (Actually, it's pretty much a copyright violation.) NE Ent 23:44, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't see any citation for that paragraph that he added. Even if it was covered in another citation, when adding a paragraph that is this strong, at least one citation should accompany the paragraph at the end, even if it is a repeat of a previous citation. Maybe it is an issue of how it was formatted, but I usually assume someone knows how to format a citation when they are busy adding so much material and their citations have been discussed at length previously. Dennis Brown / 2¢ / © / @ / Join WER 22:25, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry

This account has been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month for sock puppetry per evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/LarryTr7. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not. Once the block has expired, you're welcome to make useful contributions. If you believe that this block was in error, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:28, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

LarryTr7 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am not using multiple accounts any more. On the other hand, please investigate whether King of Hearts and Fearofreprisal are using the same IP address.

Decline reason:

Attempting to undermine the blocking administrator by making claims of sockpuppetry won't help, nor will the kind of accusations you made in your UTRS request.—Kww(talk) 17:59, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

LarryTr7 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Multiple account use happened months ago, and blocking has been served. Other accounts were never used after that period of blocking. Please review account activities according to time. LarryTr7 (talk) 06:26, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

While I still think it's possible to likely that LarryTr7 is socking, I must admit that the evidence is not conclusive and we should presume innocent unless proven guilty. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:03, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What about the edits by User:AhChoy13002 and the two IPs detailed at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/LarryTr7? They were editing over the past couple of days. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:40, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What's this AhChoy13002 account? It's not among those I have used before (listed below). Please verify its IP.

Laserweld, Richewald, 高阶陶瓷, DevanYaris, Kellytriangle. LarryTr7 (talk) 07:06, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Is anybody able to handle this technical issue? I believe someone has misused the blocking function. LarryTr7 (talk) 07:27, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Checkuser request is awaiting additional information - and if that is provided the check will probably be run. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:59, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. It will be interesting to know who attributed that account to me.
In addition, the editor who is most hostile to me, Fearofreprisal, doesn't even have a talk page. She is very active on this page about Ping Fu. Is there something wrong with her account? LarryTr7 (talk) 00:42, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I filed the sockpuppet investigation, as you would be able to see if you went looking for it. As for Fearofreprisal, they do have a talk page - you're linking to article space, not userspace. As to your comments about Fearofreprisal and King of Hearts needing checking - I can categorically say they are not the same user (after all, why would King of Hearts need a sockpuppet?) Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 07:57, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comment, Lukeno94. I agree now that Fearofreprisal and King of Hearts are not likely to be from same person. I am trying to learn more about how to work with Wikipedia. The remaining question is the last one I posted: how come Ahchoy13002 has been attributed to my account, which is equivalent to: how was the blocking triggered this time? LarryTr7 (talk) 03:51, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wondering what's the investigation result. Meanwhile, I am reading this to kill time: Bloomberg and SCMP! LarryTr7 (talk) 05:49, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:King of Hearts made the last blocks at the SPI but it was a duck block, and deemed unlikely by CU. There was only one edit by that sock. I'm thinking King might want to review that block and linkage again. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 09:11, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Slight correction: King of Hearts blocked LarryTr7 based on a case I raised about User:Wwwdotwww, a day before the case you're referring to. That account came back as "Possible". Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 09:28, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wondering how to improve this kind of sock-checking. There should be no reason to assign any unwelcome account to a known 'bad' one, without any evidence. This time I am surprised by the assignment of user account Wwwdotwww. I have to say the technical method in this process is pretty much a failure. LarryTr7 (talk) 06:45, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]