Misplaced Pages

User talk:TheTakeover: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 21:48, 5 August 2011 editJBW (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators195,730 edits Declining unblock request← Previous edit Revision as of 22:05, 5 August 2011 edit undoDegenFarang (talk | contribs)2,116 editsNo edit summaryNext edit →
Line 42: Line 42:


{{unblock reviewed | 1= Since I have only edited for about a year and a half and this is my first (and hopefully last time) being blocked, I don't know the proper technique on reapplying to be unblocked. I have left the text above because I am not sure if it is ok to remove it. The allegations of me being a sockpuppet of 2005 are completely false. I am not the same person and do not know the person. When I first started editing Misplaced Pages, I thought it would be fun and mentally stimulating to edit a website that is widely recognized as a "place to go for reliable information." I thought the subjects I could contribute to the most are the ones I know best, Hip Hop and Games (specifically poker). The more I edited the poker section, the more I saw the same familiar faces including 2005. He had edited for several years and had a decent track record of doing things "by the book" so I respected what he had to say. Because of this newfound respect, I may have been a little too eager to do things like he has which has lead me to this sock puppet ban. As I stated above, I am NOT him. When I look at the evidence, I don't see how his and my histories are similar enough to make it look like I am his sockpuppet. I edit a lot of poker articles, specifically poker player stats because I know that it will then go to my watchlist where I will be able to keep a bettereye on it and possible vandalism. What I can state for CERTAIN is that I am my OWN person and have only logged onto one account on the Misplaced Pages in my entire life (which can be verified by an ip address check. As far as Paige Barbeu is concerned, the person is my friend. I was originally going to deny that I knew the person because I didn't want them to receive the harrasment (from the accuser) like I have been receiving, but decided it was in my best interest to come clean about it since we registered within a day of each other. This came about when we were both looking at the Misplaced Pages and thought it would be fun to contribute. We each signed up for an account. I don't see there are any rules against this. If you do an ip check on the two of us, you will be able to see that there is absolutely NO way that we can be the same person considering we live 500+ miles apart and have made edits within an hour of each other. Also, as stated above, I can send in information to prove who I am. Knowing my friend, they wouldn't have a problem doing the same thing. I am once again asking for the block to be removed so that I can continue to edit productively on the Misplaced Pages again. If necessary, I would be willing to stay away from the poker category for a short time to prove my good intentions. ] (]) 17:58, 5 August 2011 (UTC) | decline=The claim that the three accounts are operated by three independent people is an insult to the intelligence of anyone who has spent a couple of minutes looking at their editing histories. In my six years on Misplaced Pages I have never heard a ] quack anything like so loudly. Probable sockpuppets, but certainly either that or meatpuppets, and it doesn't matter which. ] (]) 21:48, 5 August 2011 (UTC)}} {{unblock reviewed | 1= Since I have only edited for about a year and a half and this is my first (and hopefully last time) being blocked, I don't know the proper technique on reapplying to be unblocked. I have left the text above because I am not sure if it is ok to remove it. The allegations of me being a sockpuppet of 2005 are completely false. I am not the same person and do not know the person. When I first started editing Misplaced Pages, I thought it would be fun and mentally stimulating to edit a website that is widely recognized as a "place to go for reliable information." I thought the subjects I could contribute to the most are the ones I know best, Hip Hop and Games (specifically poker). The more I edited the poker section, the more I saw the same familiar faces including 2005. He had edited for several years and had a decent track record of doing things "by the book" so I respected what he had to say. Because of this newfound respect, I may have been a little too eager to do things like he has which has lead me to this sock puppet ban. As I stated above, I am NOT him. When I look at the evidence, I don't see how his and my histories are similar enough to make it look like I am his sockpuppet. I edit a lot of poker articles, specifically poker player stats because I know that it will then go to my watchlist where I will be able to keep a bettereye on it and possible vandalism. What I can state for CERTAIN is that I am my OWN person and have only logged onto one account on the Misplaced Pages in my entire life (which can be verified by an ip address check. As far as Paige Barbeu is concerned, the person is my friend. I was originally going to deny that I knew the person because I didn't want them to receive the harrasment (from the accuser) like I have been receiving, but decided it was in my best interest to come clean about it since we registered within a day of each other. This came about when we were both looking at the Misplaced Pages and thought it would be fun to contribute. We each signed up for an account. I don't see there are any rules against this. If you do an ip check on the two of us, you will be able to see that there is absolutely NO way that we can be the same person considering we live 500+ miles apart and have made edits within an hour of each other. Also, as stated above, I can send in information to prove who I am. Knowing my friend, they wouldn't have a problem doing the same thing. I am once again asking for the block to be removed so that I can continue to edit productively on the Misplaced Pages again. If necessary, I would be willing to stay away from the poker category for a short time to prove my good intentions. ] (]) 17:58, 5 August 2011 (UTC) | decline=The claim that the three accounts are operated by three independent people is an insult to the intelligence of anyone who has spent a couple of minutes looking at their editing histories. In my six years on Misplaced Pages I have never heard a ] quack anything like so loudly. Probable sockpuppets, but certainly either that or meatpuppets, and it doesn't matter which. ] (]) 21:48, 5 August 2011 (UTC)}}

gg

Revision as of 22:05, 5 August 2011

Welcome

Welcome!

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

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! — ξ 23:59, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Poker Babes

I don't think edit warring is the proper way to solve this. Poker-Babes is a self published source and is used in a massive number of articles as a reference and as an external link. This is clearly not warranted as this is not a PokerNews type authoritative poker website, it is the opinions of one person. Were it used sparingly I would not have a problem with it but it is clear somebody has been very aggressive about inserting this site into as many Misplaced Pages articles as possible and I don't think that is appropriate and it clearly meets my definition of 'spam' DegenFarang (talk) 02:29, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

You seem to have a long standing personal gripe. Obviously the site is not spam. It is owned by PokerStars now, which means it isn't self-published. TheTakeover (talk) 04:08, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Edit_Warring

AN/I

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. CycloneGU (talk) 13:59, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

External Link Spam

Look at the articles for very famous poker players. There is a reason you don't see 95 external links to every site that has ever done an interview or a profile on that player - because to allow that would invite massive amounts of spam. This standard must be applied to all of the articles. If these interviews or references provide useful information unavailable elsewhere it can be used as a reference and included in the article. External links are for official sites or completely objective data such as tournament or cash game results.

If you do not agree or you are unwilling to discuss this prior to reverting my edits, take this matter to dispute resolution or a noticeboard. Reverting my edits by flatly declaring I am wrong is not acceptable. You will be blocked if you continue this behavior. You have been warned. DegenFarang (talk) 12:54, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Don't threaten me and say "You will be blocked" and "You have been warned." I am doing what I think is in the best interest of the Misplaced Pages poker articles and the rules that I must abide by. You obviously don't have a problem with external links, you have a problem with external links on Steve Badger and Shirley Rosario's page. I have looked at many, many poker player pages and there are so many edits that need to be done and so many that need sourcing yet you insist on wasting your time (and now my time) by editing the same two articles into the ground. And don't think it fooled me that you just "happened" to edit a few more poker players article this time. The ONLY people you edited yesterday are the people that I have worked on over the past week; Maria Ho, Jennifer Leigh, Allen Cunningham, Tiffany Michelle, Shirley Rosario, and Steve Badger.
As far as the external links on the said pages, they are valid links. I am not the only one who is reverting you. Since I have started editing the Misplaced Pages, I noticed that many editors have reverted you. Over the past few weeks, at least four editors have done so. I am not launching a personal attack on you, I just happen to think you are wrong which seems to be the concensus.TheTakeover (talk) 17:20, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
I don't have time to remove these links from all poker players right now but I will keep doing so over time. I assure you I want them off of all poker articles. They are just spam for various poker affiliate sites. DegenFarang (talk) 14:07, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
It's not up to you. Other editors don't have to do what you say even if you tell them, "You have been warned." And it is obvious from the history of the poker player articles that many editors believe these links are relevant. TheTakeover (talk) 02:32, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
lol try harder 2005 DegenFarang (talk) 13:40, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Blocked???

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).

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

Request reason:

I was blocked yesterday for being a "sockpuppet" of user 2005. I am not 2005, nor do I know him. It is obvious from our histories that neither one of us agree with the abusive user, DegenFarang. However, agreeing with him doesn't mean that I AM him. Our histories prove that he has edited several years longer than I have and that although we have some articles in common (which is very likely considering we are both interested in poker), our common interests/edits are not in the same category. I am an avid Hip/Hop listener and spend much of my time editing the that category. From the looks of his "contribs", he has never edited one. The problem really is with the editor DegenFarang. I started editing poker and saw how he was attacking some of the profiles with a vengeance. It was very easy for me to see especially recently with his personal attacks against me (take a note how he did it again today), that he has a beef with anybody that doesn't agree with him. From what I have read, he has been banned several times and is continually a problem. A simple look at mine and 2005's ip addresses will prove that I am NOT 2005 and have NEVER logged onto the same computer. I would like my account unblocked immediately. TheTakeover (talk) 17:00, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Decline reason:

I've reviewed the evidence presented at Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/2005 and find it compelling. Your reasoning here, pointing out what you don't have in common, is weak. You should read WP:NOTTHEM before trying to appeal this block again. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:26, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

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 is laughable. Just review the edit summaries of the other sockpuppet and you'll see they are identical. They used the exact same spelling and syntax multple times. DegenFarang (talk) 17:19, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
What's laughable is that you are comparing "spelling." Either a person knows how to spell or doesn't. "They are a sockpuppet because they spell the same" - That is just ridiculous. My edit summaries and 2005's edit summaries are not even close to being identicle.
Go look at your edit summaries on your main account and two sock puppets. You chose identical wording multiple times on all three accounts...right down to punctuation and syntax. It's not worth my time to find the examples but you'll see if you compare your various edit summaries. DegenFarang (talk) 18:47, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
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).

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

Request reason:

Since I have only edited for about a year and a half and this is my first (and hopefully last time) being blocked, I don't know the proper technique on reapplying to be unblocked. I have left the text above because I am not sure if it is ok to remove it. The allegations of me being a sockpuppet of 2005 are completely false. I am not the same person and do not know the person. When I first started editing Misplaced Pages, I thought it would be fun and mentally stimulating to edit a website that is widely recognized as a "place to go for reliable information." I thought the subjects I could contribute to the most are the ones I know best, Hip Hop and Games (specifically poker). The more I edited the poker section, the more I saw the same familiar faces including 2005. He had edited for several years and had a decent track record of doing things "by the book" so I respected what he had to say. Because of this newfound respect, I may have been a little too eager to do things like he has which has lead me to this sock puppet ban. As I stated above, I am NOT him. When I look at the evidence, I don't see how his and my histories are similar enough to make it look like I am his sockpuppet. I edit a lot of poker articles, specifically poker player stats because I know that it will then go to my watchlist where I will be able to keep a bettereye on it and possible vandalism. What I can state for CERTAIN is that I am my OWN person and have only logged onto one account on the Misplaced Pages in my entire life (which can be verified by an ip address check. As far as Paige Barbeu is concerned, the person is my friend. I was originally going to deny that I knew the person because I didn't want them to receive the harrasment (from the accuser) like I have been receiving, but decided it was in my best interest to come clean about it since we registered within a day of each other. This came about when we were both looking at the Misplaced Pages and thought it would be fun to contribute. We each signed up for an account. I don't see there are any rules against this. If you do an ip check on the two of us, you will be able to see that there is absolutely NO way that we can be the same person considering we live 500+ miles apart and have made edits within an hour of each other. Also, as stated above, I can send in information to prove who I am. Knowing my friend, they wouldn't have a problem doing the same thing. I am once again asking for the block to be removed so that I can continue to edit productively on the Misplaced Pages again. If necessary, I would be willing to stay away from the poker category for a short time to prove my good intentions. TheTakeover (talk) 17:58, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Decline reason:

The claim that the three accounts are operated by three independent people is an insult to the intelligence of anyone who has spent a couple of minutes looking at their editing histories. In my six years on Misplaced Pages I have never heard a WP:DUCK quack anything like so loudly. Probable sockpuppets, but certainly either that or meatpuppets, and it doesn't matter which. JamesBWatson (talk) 21:48, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

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.

gg