User talk:GadgetsGuy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from User talk:GalaxyOptimus)
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome![edit]

Hello, GalaxyOptimus, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages 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!

January 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Samsung Galaxy Tab Pro 8.4 may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • Remote (Peel), Smart Stay, Multi-Window, Group Play, and All Share Play.<ref name=microsite-spec>{{cite web|title=Samsung GALAXY Tab Pro|url=http://www.samsung.com/global/microsite/galaxypro/spec.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:48, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

The discussion (I started)[edit]

[[1]] comp.arch (talk) 17:05, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

There is no consensus yet on whether to standardize of to retain so in the mean time let us retain the format until a consensus has been reached. GalaxyOptimus (talk) 17:34, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
I can argue for one or the other. Mostly I just want to know what is right or most done and standardize on that (in the MOS). I don't really care to much which one is the standard. If (in another article) it were the other way around would you not change as there is no consensus? comp.arch (talk) 20:26, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

A cookie for you![edit]

Choco chip cookie.png Great job expanding the article Samsung Galaxy Note Pro 12.2! Thanks for your contributions. ///EuroCarGT 21:28, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Galaxy spamming account blocked[edit]

Your account has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia because it appears to be mainly intended for publicity and/or promotional purposes. If you intend to edit constructively in other topic areas, you may be granted the right to continue under a change of username. Please read the following carefully.
Why can't I edit Wikipedia?

Your account's edits and/or username indicate that it is being used on behalf of a company, group, website or organization for purposes of promotion and/or publicity. The edits may have violated one or more of our rules on spamming, which include: adding inappropriate external links, posting advertisements and using Wikipedia for promotion. Wikipedia has many articles on companies, groups, and organizations, but such groups are generally discouraged from using Wikipedia to write about themselves. In addition, usernames like yours are disallowed under our username policy.

Am I allowed to make these edits if I change my username?

Probably not, although if you can demonstrate a pattern of future editing in strict accordance with our neutral point of view policy, you may be granted this right. See Wikipedia's FAQ for Organizations for a helpful list of frequently asked questions by people in your position. Also, review the conflict of interest guidance to see the kinds of limitations you would have to obey if you did want to continue editing about your company, group, organization, or clients. If this does not fit in with your goals, then you will not be allowed to edit Wikipedia again.

What can I do now?

If you have no interest in writing about some other topic than your organization, group, company, or product, you may consider using one of the many websites that allow this instead.

If you do intend to make useful contributions here about some other topic, you must convince a Wikipedia administrator that you mean it. To that end, please do the following:

  • Add the text {{unblock-spamun|Your proposed new username|Your reason here}} on your user talk page.
  • Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with a new username you are willing to use. See Special:Listusers to search for available usernames. Your new username will need to meet our username policy.
  • Replace the text "Your reason here" with your reason to be unblocked. In this reason, you must:
    • Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the edits for which you were blocked.
    • Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked.
If you believe this block was made in error, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

--Orange Mike | Talk 04:02, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Approve icon.svg
This user's request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

GadgetsGuy (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribsdeleted contribsabuse filter logcreation logchange block settingsunblock)


Requested username:

GadgetsGuy (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)

Request reason:

I want to make it clear that i do not represent any organization as it might seem such as I contributed many articles regarding samsung devices so in order to conform to wikipedia rules i change my name to a neutral one in which does not reflect any name of any current organizations brand and I think my edits are neutral enough and are not promotional in manner as I do not post such words as "great" or best and only describe the product very well plus some of the basic content such as chaton was carried over from existing articles. I know such ruling that is why my contributions are neutral enough I know my username was the issue so may I request for a change, Thanks!

Accept reason:

Allowing username change to requested username. Please put this request in at Wikipedia:Changing username as soon as possible to avoid re-blocking. only (talk) 23:02, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Unblocking administrator: Please check for active autoblocks on this user after accepting the unblock request.

Here are a few key questions:

You are currently blocked because your username appears directly related to a company, group or product that you have been promoting, contrary to the username policy. Changing the username will not allow you to violate the 3 important principles above. Daniel Case (talk) 19:19, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

* I understand that wikipedia is not a business directory but a enyclopedia that is why I make sure my contributions are neutral enough
  • I understand wikipedia conflict of interest that is why im requesting for a name change as I have been accused of such
  • I understand that there should by notability for a subject to have an article that is why I make sure that I have third party sources in my contribution GalaxyOptimus (talk) 01:17, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Images[edit]

Firstly, that S5 image is a non-free image and is clearly being used under fair use. What exactly is the problem?

Also, you mention flickrwashing and "questionable licensing" consistently, but have no citations. What gives? ViperSnake151  Talk  03:54, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

To answer your question, about the flickrwashing comment, please do your research and look at wikimedia commons for samsung belgium's images before and you will see that it was agreed upon that user is merely a flickrwashing account and that most or all of the images uploaded via bot licensed to it was agreed upon by administrators to be deleted. Second, those type of images that are clearly just obtained without permission from samsung by the article owner of which the image was licensed is a violation of wikipedia and wikimedia's image use as the site owner does not have any right on determining the license of the image as it is not his in the first place. This was proven before based on my research on images uploaded with the same kind of licenses but was deemed by reviewers and administrators that it is in violation of some wiki rules. I hope that answers the questions and let admins see if the image is allowed or not so for now let us remove the images first until a decision has been made.GadgetsGuy (talk) 04:05, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
You make these accusations but don't provide links to relevant discussions. You even removed an obviously user-created image (they don't usually ship with CyanogenMod) because you thought it needed OTRS permission. ViperSnake151  Talk  04:14, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
I have no power to remove the image, all I can do is nominate so if it was deleted, then an administrator deemed my observations right. Right?GadgetsGuy (talk) 04:37, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

February 2014[edit]

Information icon Hello, GadgetsGuy, 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, and users who use multiple accounts may be blocked from editing. If you operate multiple accounts directly or with the help of another person, please remember to disclose these connections. ViperSnake151  Talk  03:57, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Samsung Galaxy S5. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

  1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
  2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. ViperSnake151  Talk  03:59, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion[edit]

Information icon Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:GadgetsGuy reported by User:ViperSnake151 (Result: ). Thank you. ViperSnake151  Talk  04:04, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Your use of multiple Wikipedia accounts[edit]

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/GadgetsGuy, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

ViperSnake151  Talk  04:10, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

As I stated at the SPI case, it's clear that this was just a mistake. I've blocked GalaxyOptimus to prevent you from accidentally logging into that account and editing without noticing it. I was careful to try to prevent an autoblock on the IP so that you're not accidentally blocked here as well, but if you run into problems shoot me an email from my user page. -- Atama 19:41, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 27[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Samsung Galaxy S Duos 2, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Android (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:50, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

"Better" image?[edit]

Some of your images have some accuracy issues with the rendering that miss important details (particularly on the LG ones, where the official renders show that the logo on the white version is faded, and not pure black.

Also, are you desperately trying to standardize them all on white phones? Though, I appreciate your effort on the renders, especially on the more obscure devices. Think you could do some for some of the more obscure HTC phones too? (HTC Rhyme and First could use some the most. Just, make sure you make the Rhyme one be that burgundy color) ViperSnake151  Talk  14:51, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Copyright issues? But that's an image sourced from LG themselves, which means that they would have authorization to do so. You seem to assert that because it is "directly copyrighted by LG", its regional subsidiaries do not have authorization to release press images under different licenses? ViperSnake151  Talk  16:21, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
See Commons:Deletion_requests/File:LG_G2_(Black).jpg. That account is official (it's linked from a Korean LG page) ViperSnake151  Talk  16:32, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
You claim there is consensus, but are opaque. Please link to the relevant discussion. Again, you make claims of discussions without specifically citing them. ViperSnake151  Talk  00:07, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
The opaque argument is not included in the license argument. It is mere a gramatical error. Regarding the consensus before give me time im going to search it again on the archives which is a long process.GadgetsGuy (talk) 00:16, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
The burden of proof is on you. Please link to the discussion, or retract your assertions. ViperSnake151  Talk  01:13, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
Im gonna need more time to do such as i have other things such as a time-consuming job to attend to but rest assured that if I would have the sufficient time and be able to find it, I would immediately link the item. GadgetsGuy (talk) 07:01, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
Your image of the G3 still misrepresents the design of the phone. It is not solid white. It has a rounded metallic effect. ViperSnake151  Talk  19:01, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Also[edit]

I will restore the old image on the G2 article, per the closing result of the deletion request, which completely disagrees with your assertion.

Kept. This is an image which LG has explicitly released. It is entirely safe to assume that the release covers both the copyright for the photograph of the device and the copyright for the image on the device. I cannot believe that LG released the former, but left the latter as a "gotcha" to trap users of the image

However, assuming that you edit the image to better reflect the actual finish, I actually will keep the G3 image because its cropped better. ViperSnake151  Talk  19:03, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

No, only on the G3 article it is better. You are still persistently trying force your own images as an all or nothing tactic. Please stop edit warring over such stupid topics. ViperSnake151  Talk  23:21, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

June 2014[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. ViperSnake151  Talk  23:37, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Samsung Galaxy Tab 3 7.0[edit]

Yes, I've been trying to find a source that says it can handle more than 64GB. In theory, if it can handle SDXC at all, it should be able to handle all SDXC cards, up to 2TB. It definitely works with 128GB cards, but my only source for that is myself, and that won't do. Some official sources claim 32GB...? Oh well... Le Lapin Vert (talk) 18:53, 14 July 2014 (UTC)