User talk:OC31113
Re: 3RR
[edit]If I may be so bold, Eric (or Eric's friend), please go about a different method in your continuous quest of the changing of the Anaheim Hills article name. It is getting absolutely nowhere. Someone is going to eventually file a RfArb and I am sure conduct all sides are going to come under great scrutiny. Any sock puppets will be revealed and the constant warring over the article title and infobox will look extremely bad. Obviously, you feel very compassionate about this issue. However, having this issue (and more importantly, the edit warring) drag on for well over 6 weeks by both sides is absolutely unacceptable. Why don't you be bold and step up and try to resolve this issue appropriately? Ask if both sides will agree to use a mediator and agree to uphold whatever conclusions that the mediator agrees to. I haven't verified this myself, but I believe Wikipedia policies and guidelines are fairly clear about the issue, but obviously that hasn't had any effect whatsoever at ending the stalemate, hence my suggestion of a mediator.
Now to address your concern about the 3RR violation. Personally, I have been on WP very sporadically over the last few weeks. I have been trying to take a wikibreak, but felt I should try to leave you a message about my 2 cents on how this situation should be resolved. I suggest you report this (and any further incidents) to WP:AN/3RR instead of leaving it on a few admins' talk pages. You will probably get a quicker response. I'm not saying don't leave a few talk messages, just be sure to post it on the 3RR board first for great exposure. Have a good evening. --PS2pcGAMER (talk)
Thanks
[edit]Hey, thanks for covering for me while i was on my 3rr restriction. Continue supporting the Anaheim Hills page! --Ericsaindon2 10:30, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
Request for arbitration against you has been opened
[edit]I've nominated you as an involved user. Please submit a statement. See Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration. --Coolcaesar 00:08, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
Hello
[edit]Ummmm.it was nice of you to claim credit for my work on Daniel Bryants userpage for the sake of simplicity, but all that did was reinforce their point in believing that I am your sockpuppet. We dont want this untruth to be blown out of proportion, because we have never met in person, so there is no way that we are sockpuppets, so lets try to not counter ourselves by doing things that trigger their few brain cells. --Ericsaindon2 21:11, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
Hey
[edit]Hey, thanks for letting me use your account during my 3rr, it felt like the 3rr went on for 7 or so days, so thanks a bunch. Talk to you when you get back. --Ericsaindon2 10:34, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
Hey vs. Hello
[edit]I'm kind of confused by your above edits Ericsaindon2. On July 17, you claimed that you had never met OC31113 in person, but two days later he is allowing you to let you sign in using his IP address. This is starting to look like a pretty sloppy case of sockpuppetry when looked at with this edit [1] by Ericsaindon2. You certainly seem to have a lot of knowledge about the Southland and especially Orange County and Anaheim, but in the Anaheim Hills conflict community consensus is clearly against you. These tactics aren't going to change that, and they certainly aren't helping your case. Danielross40 03:10, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
I have noted you as an involved party and/or commenter upon the behavior of user:Coolcaesar in the filed Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration. I greatly wish that you would comment on his behavior, and add references, links, etc. supporting your particular view to the current evidence already there. Please also explain his attitude/comments/witnessed behavior with detail about your experience in dealing with him. I do greatly appreciate it, and note that your reputation is protected upon comments at arbitration, and cannot be used against you. Thanks for your Time. --Mr.Executive 08:02, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
Hello,
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ericsaindon2. Please add evidence to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ericsaindon2/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ericsaindon2/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, --Tony Sidaway 11:23, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
La Jolla
[edit]I would appreciate you weighing in on the discussion about the naming of the La Jolla article on the La Jolla, San Diego, California Talk page. Right now the page is blocked from being renamed (in particular to La Jolla or La Jolla, California) based on the assumption that there is a consensus to name it according to the [[community, city, state]] convention. Thanks. --Serge 00:43, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Patience
[edit]Regarding the RFC suggestion, I'll look into it. I think the first thing we need to do is find a place to develop our argument and a plan, and continue recruiting folks who agree with it. Not sure if RFC is the right place. Ultimately, we're talking about a large sweeping change that involves updating policy pages (naming guidelines) as well as countless individual article pages. It's a lot of work and will require a large group of people who are cooperative and consistent. I think it will be a lot of preparation culminating in one big sudden change, kind of like when a country switches from driving on one side of the road to the other. I was thinking of starting to work on an early version of the argument and plan on my own talk page, and only "going public" (like in an RFC) when he have a few more folks on our side, and consensus on a fairly polished plan. It will take time. We need to be patient. For now, it's important to not get tied up in revert wars and other pointless tit-for-tat squabbles. Logical and well-reasoned discourse is what we need to produce, consistently. --Serge 20:00, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Shenanigans like the stuff going on the La Jolla page does not help our cause. Thanks. --Serge 01:33, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
Too bad you're blocked. That is most certainly not helpful to our cause. I advise you to request unblocking after at least a week of cooling down, and then come back a new, cooperative man. Avoid the shenanigans and revert wars. That gets us no where. On the other hand, there is a promising turn of events at Talk:Chicago, Illinois. Check it out. Logic and reason are on our side. We just have to be patient. --Serge 21:45, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
- Ericsaindon2's block will expire on the 19th, at which time he may again participate. -Will Beback 21:57, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
This case is now closed and the result has been published at the link above.
- Ericsaindon2 is required to choose one username and edit only with that name.
- Ericsaindon2 is banned from Wikipedia for one year due to a variety of disruptive activities.
- Ericsaindon2 is placed on Probation. He may be banned for an appropriate time from any article or set of articles which he disrupts.
For the Arbitration Committee. --FloNight 05:58, 3 September 2006 (UTC)