User talk:Ocatecir/Archive7

Thanks

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]

The Black Wallstreet

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]

Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority Police

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

The article Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority Police was speedily deleted after I had added two references about the arrest of a celebrity by airport police. Perhaps someone with more access to information about southern California might consider recreating and expanding the article

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]

Nice

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]

Howard Stern Show - RFC: Fan bulletin boards

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

WP:EL

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]

Frank Carney

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]

My recent RfA

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]

DreamGuy

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:

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]

Good lord, that's not a "list of DreamGuy's misdeeds" it's a "list of problem editors making false claims about DreamGuy", and a sizable number of the people involved in such complaints have been permanently banned from Wikipedia as longtime and unrepentant problem editors, while others have been temporarily banned on numerous occasions. Actually taking the time to READ those pages shows that the claims are false, but you just want to believe I am bad and want to deceive other people into thinking it also by presenting a long list of links you hope they don;t bother to read. DreamGuy 06:14, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I did see that most of those fell flat on their face or were handled mildly by other admins, that's why I have taken no action against you. Obviously it shows people have had problems with you in the past, but there's nothing that indicates major policy problems that require immediate intervention. Most of them stem from content disputes, which tend to get nasty on occasion. WIth this I hope to put an end to my involvement in this situation. — Ocatecir ^T 09:06, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:67.182.10.158

...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]

Business deleted?

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]

CIG

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]

User talk:Editor in Canada

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]

List of films with disabled protagonists

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]

Template:World War II assistance needed

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]

Page protected for 24 hours, user warned not to edit war. — Ocatecir ^T 16:05, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot. Regards, Piotr Mikołajski 17:12, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In fact it was user Piotr Mikołajski who inserted this crap that the USSR was ally of Germany. the issue has been already discussed in the talk page [2] with consensus.--Dojarca 20:31, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm flabbergasted at this instance of forum-shopping. Should we close WP:RFP and all go to Ocatecir's page with our requests? If there ever has been a wrong version, this one is the most inflammatory I have seen so far. --Ghirla^-трёп- 20:55, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure how this is forum shopping, I have had no interactions with either editor or this page and am not even sure how I was selected. What I did see was an edit war and made a judgment call. I looked at the talk page and saw no recent discussion. My apologies if you don't agree with the version I protected, I just wanted to quell the edit war. — Ocatecir ^T 23:38, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Now you can see the old discussion where Piotr Mikołajski was the only user to insist on his version. Anyway you placed the warning only on my talk page.--Dojarca 07:10, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ocatecir, there is nothing special or strange with your choice. I didn't wanted to ask my fellow admins to avoid any accusations and you was first admin with political science and history knowledge which I could find.

I can understand that Russians don't like to hear about their alliance with Third Reich but some historical facts can't be hidden or silenced. Soviet Union signed Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, invaded Poland in September 1939, attacked Finland and occupied Baltic states, all with lesser or greater cooperation with Third Reich. Ghirlandajo's suggestions about asking familiar admin and forum shopping are abusive to me. Unfortunately I have no idea where can I sent my complaints because asking admins is considered as some kind of "plot". Piotr Mikołajski 07:14, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In theory I agree with you that the non-aggression pact can't can't be seen as being carried out with benevolent intentions due to the polish invasion, but I don't know if we can go as far as calling the USSR an axis power from 1939-1941. My main concern as an admin right now is quelling the edit war. Consider starting a RFC or other related third opinion process to get outside opinions. I just don't wan't to see edit warring. I understand the issue is very heated between the Polish and the Russians but we must remember Wikipedia is not a soapbox. Thanks for your understanding. — Ocatecir ^T 09:00, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Of course USSR was not Axis power but was de facto German ally between 1939 and 1941. It's difficult to put such details into WWII Template which is general and where difference between Axis member and German ally can't be shown. I'm far from forcing my POV there and far from heating anything. The only thing I wanted was to keep info about Winter war and Occupation of Baltic states - that's situation after your action and I'm happy with it. These two links mentioned above were removed by our Russian colleagues because "Soviet Union was not in war before 1941" - I can't agree with such approach. Thanks again for your intervention, Piotr Mikołajski 17:06, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Troll still angry over External Link Deletion

One of the editors who I believe is just acting as a troll blanked the fan site discussion from the Bubba the Love Sponge talkpage archive diff. It isn't surprising given his history with the talk page and the fact that he was the one who archived the page, hence why I had it watch listed. I've already brought it up with the editor who has been dealing with him at his talk page, but I was just wondering if you had any suggestions on the best way to respond or not respond to his behavior. You are familiar with the various stern pages and their problem with external links, so I figured you may be able to assist. I'm trying to stay out of direct involvement with this one to keep things calm.Optigan13 05:16, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since his contribution history only has one edit, therefore not indicating any set agenda, the best way to deal with him is to warn him every time he violates policy. If he continues to violate policy despite the warnings I will block him. The discussion is obviously very relevant to the article, its obvious that any effort to hide the discussion is because the editor does not agree with the opinions expressed in it. The best way to handle it is the usual way of warnings so that admins can see a pattern. Thanks for the heads up. — Ocatecir ^T 08:55, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fausto Vitello

I removed the statement about Vitello starting Independent and offering high quality parts made in the US as opposed to China. This statement, while referenced, was made by his son, Tony Vitello, after his death. Plus it was actually taking about a different era, as it is the current day that a trend is developing with manufacturers switching to manufacturing in China. At the time Independent started, most stuff was being made in the US. Dubkiller 18:13, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Understood, thanks for the explanation. — Ocatecir ^T 19:03, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

gamecasa reference to cky crew members

Hello, I represent some of the cky members recent projects and have updated external links and current projects only to log in today and see they have been removed. Can you please let me know why or if I need to follow some other format of having these added to the pages. There are several other projects I'll be adding and would like the information to be there for fans of the staff.

There is also no direct page for Art Webb and the Gamecasa crew that I hope to add shortly. Radio Bam and other CKY members projects have been added so if the reason is in relation to promotion that was not my intent.

Thank you!

edit I provided more information on the gamecasa talk page as to why I propose this information be added...thanks again! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gamecasa (talk • contribs) 21:52, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

#wikipedia-en-admins

Re: your message to Majorly. Did you type:

/cs invite #wikipedia-en-admins

before you tried to join the channel? WjBscribe 04:10, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, missed that part. Failure to follow simple instructions. Thanks! — Ocatecir ^T 04:13, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

IRC cloak request

I am Ocatecir on freenode and I would like the cloak wikipedia/ocatecir. Thanks. --— Ocatecir ^T 04:19, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RfA thanks

Hi Ocatecir. Thank you for your support and kind words in my RfA, which passed with 95 support, 1 oppose, and 1 neutral !votes. It means a lot to me to have your individual support and the collective support of so many others. I truly will strive to carry myself at a level representing the trust bestowed in me as I use the mop to address the never-ending drips of discontent in need of caretaker assistance.

Jreferee ^(Talk) 07:30, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]