User talk:Chiboyers
Welcome to Wikipedia from Aboutmovies
Hi, Chiboyers. I welcome you to Wikipedia! Thank you for all of your edits. I hope you like editing here and being part of Wikipedia! Please sign your name on talk pages using four squiggles (~~~~); when you save the page, this will turn into your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or put {{helpme}} (and what you need help with) on your talk page and someone will show up very soon to answer your questions. Again, welcome!
Aboutmovies (talk) 10:14, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Re your comments at Circumcision page
Re "based on a lie" and similar comments: Please review the Wikipedia policies and guidelines WP:Civility and WP:AGF. It's quite fine to state that something is false and refute it, but the word "lie" says something about the person. ☺ Coppertwig (talk) 16:48, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Blocked
This user is a clear sock puppet for banned User:Mctrain. See Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Societyfinalclubs. --Daniel J. Leivick (talk) 05:50, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Chiboyers (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I have never edited under the name "McTrain" or any other name except "Chiboyers", whomever did this block is completely confused-and I would like to be unblocked
Decline reason:
Your editing pattern is similar enough to make a very persuasive case that you are indeed that banned user. Please, check the mirror again. — FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 11:36, 5 June 2008 (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 odd. Your username doesn't even appear on Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Societyfinalclubs or Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Societyfinalclubs. I'll leave a note for the blocking admin. -- Ned Scott 07:46, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
- Seems this specific block was done based on this alone. -- Ned Scott 07:50, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
- It looks like you were blocked because your edits were near identical to the ones that were being made by a user who has already been blocked. It certainly does look like you are that user, so your best bet at getting this resolved would be to explain your edits to Barbaro family. -- Ned Scott 07:58, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
- Seems this specific block was done based on this alone. -- Ned Scott 07:50, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
I really didn't even edit anything on the Barbaro family page- all I did was change the word Von to von. It should be in the lower case. I also noticed that someone went on a rampage vandalizing everything about Barbaro subject matter, and I just reverted back to the pages that I knew were accurate- I know a great deal about this family, I'm a Northwestern alumnus with actress Aimee Garcia who attended the same high school as the current title holder. This is a well known family in Chicago, and they played a role with the development of the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago. Someone at Wikipedia is mixed-up and they are going against Wiki-policy of reverting well sourced accurate material, a person can't just do that because they feels like to, and now I have been blocked with someone saying that I am "McTrain". I have never edited under any name on Wikipedia except for "Chiboyers" or just with no name, annonomously. I primarily even created Chiboyers so I could engage on the talk page debate about the topic of Circumcision, which is the area of my PhD, and even on that page I had such an awful experience that I already walked away from the subject matter, as I stated on that talk page. I have no idea what is going on with Wiki administrators, but you guys are all fouled up, reverting good work and blocking people.Chiboyers (talk) 08:36, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
More information for the unblock reviewer
This is a serial inserter of hoax information. Please see User:Barneca/watch/societyfinalclubs for a list of info to get you up to speed. In particular, the SSP and RFCU report are listed at the bottom. --barneca (talk) 10:31, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
- Wiki has fouled up somewhere, becuase I have never edited under any other name than Chiboyers, and I know that you guys at Wiki are removing large bulks of valid info relating to the Barbaro family. There used to be an article about aviator Aldo Barbaro. He was noted even in an exhibition at the Museum of Science and Industry in Chicago- that valid, sourced article has since been removed, and now validly sourced historical information continues to be vandalized by you guys. Something is wrong big time, and it sure isn't me, and based on your mistake of calling me "McTrain" and the block you gave me- you guys have, clearly, screwed up majorly. Whomever is there at Wiki looking over things doesn't know what they are doingChiboyers (talk) 14:48, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Explanations Are Needed
There is something very wrong going on here, and I would like some answers to what is happening: 1) You have an article on Wikipedia, Circumcision, that is contested by several people for lack of neutrality, yet no flagging is allowed to stay on that article due to a biased agenda. 2) A user right above is saing that I am "a serial inserter of hoax information". I have never did anything of that sort, and I have barely contributed anything to Wikipedia articles except for some general linking, spelling corrections, and discusson page talk. Whomever is saying this about me also has an agenda. 3) I am being lumped into a list by user Barneca that I have no relation to, I would like an explanation for that. 4) When I wrote a comment on the Barbaro family talk page, my comment was removed against Wiki policy by someone saying "don't go there" or something of that sort. 5) I see quality sourced valid articles being deleted and stripped of valid information that I know is accurate. Now, I would like to know what is going on here with Wiki- you can't just block a person willy nilly and delete valid information because some "feel" like to, and then after you block someone, walk away as if what has just occured is just- have I suddenly entered into a communist country and wasn't aware of this?Chiboyers (talk) 16:27, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
- That's one interpretation. Here's another.
- A vandal starts adding improper information to Wikipedia.
- He is blocked, but creates a new account and starts again.
- Before long, he has dozens and dozens of accounts.
- All of the accounts of this user strenuously deny that they are the same person, and so we have to make a decision based on their editing patterns, their writing style, and other kinds of information related to the way they use their computer.
- Fortunately, it isn't just one person who does this, but hundreds, so we have a whole range of techniques for identifying these accounts, developed over the course of years.
- We don't normally tell all of the methods we use to identify multiple accounts, because then the people who are incorrectly editing will stop making those mistakes, and we'll have to develop new tools.
- Some of us live in communist countries, some in democracies, some in parliamentary monarchies, some in totalitarian states. Wikipedia transcends national boundaries.
- Eventually, most of the abusive users realize that they cannot win and stop, but they are usually replaced by new ones.
- We acknowledge that, unfortunately, we are not infallible. However, since abusive users rarely tell the truth about themselves, we have to do the best we can, and our success rate seems to be pretty high. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 16:45, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Deletion of valid sourced material and blocking people who did nothing wrong is "High Success Rates"- I'm sorry, I do not know where you live but I am an American, and this rhetoric sounds like fascism, and from what I can make out by Barneca's list, I think Wiki has either an Anti-Italian, Anti-Catholic, or Anti-Hispanic movement going on or possibly even an Anti-black, anti-Jewish, or anti-liberal agenda- or maybe even an and Anti-Chicago movement- I can't tell for sure. I just know that my blocking started as soon as I made a comment on the Barbaro family talk page, which was instantly removed, and after I said I was connected to Amiee Garcia, a hispanic, who attended a Cathoic high school in Chicago. I also know the Barbaro family did much to help both Jews and the anti-slavery movement. I think this is trying to be silenced by some at Wikipedia, please do indulge me within your expertise to justify Wiki's behaviors that clearly demonstrate bigotry and going against your own policies.Chiboyers (talk) 16:58, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Chiboyers (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
This blocking is based on falsehoods and conjecture. If adding improper information (vandalism) is the basis for blocking, and I have done no such thing- and conjecture and "feel like to" motivations are governing Wikipedia's blocking and editing policies- this is completely unacceptable practice that also seems to maybe be motivated by a larger more grave motivation of bigotry- I know for a fact that valid, accurate, and properly sourced information is being removed from selected topics/articles - This is insulting to any educated person.
Decline reason:
You have engaged in tendentious editing from almost the very beginning. — Daniel Case (talk) 03:02, 6 June 2008 (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.
You appear not to understand why you are blocked. Perhaps you are confusing this block with one you had on another account? This account is not blocked for vandalism. This account is blocked because you have already been blocked under another username- quite a few of them, in fact- and you are not allowed to create a new account to avoid a block. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 17:46, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
- I believe that I have been quite clear already that I have never edited under any other name than "Chiboyers" or just without logging in. You are confused. You are crossing my Chiboyers account with someone elses, and what is even more disturbing is that Wiki is vandalizing/ and or removing corrcet and validly sourced historical articles based on some bigotry, mix up, - I don't even know what- it doesn't even make sense. I have no idea why this is occuring, but I am pretty soured on Wikipedia- that's for sure. I stated so on the circumcision page and withdrew my involvemnt from from that "circus", and this experience here is just the topping on the cake. What is this all about?Chiboyers (talk) 18:43, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
- I don't think I have anything to add to what I've already said, and I wouldn't want to waste your time by saying any of it again. Good luck to you. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 18:46, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
- I suspect then from your "blow off" response that I must have hit the nail on the head, Wikipedia is trying to cover something up and silence certain topics or has some bigotry at work, because this is awfully strange- I have been blocked for doing nothing more than adressing a sensitive topic- Are you part of the militant pro-circumcision group that is known to silence or discredit anti-circumcision research? You can admit that- if this is what is going on, you don't have to block me with made up stuff or try to silence me- I was/am more than happy to walk away from that Wikipedia circus, I can care less what Wikipedia puts in that article, I was more interested in the discussion on that talk page as a means to enlighten/direct to areas of further research.Chiboyers (talk) 18:59, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
- I will try to give the best explanation, this has nothing to do with you edits to circumcision I didn't even look at them prior to your block. This has to do with your edits to the Barbaro family. User Mctrain and his confirmed sockpuppets added a great deal of information some of it was likely valid. However it came out that some of it was possibly hoax material. When confronted with this the hoaxing accounts reactions, i.e a creation of a number of sockpuppet accounts, anger and ridiculous pleas to personally contact various people outside of Wikipedia, such as the design head of Ferrari, made it very clear that something was off. All of the offending sockpuppets were blocked and most of what Mctrain/Socks added was removed or some cases carefully gone over and edited to avoid hoax content. Some of the content added by Mctrain/socks and deleted after the blocking was likely valid, however in the case of hoaxes it is better safe than sorry. Last night you show up. claim to be an expert in the area (a common tactic of the Mctrain sock group) and restore much of the deleted content you also have edited a number of articles which overlap with the Mctrain group's, given your low edit count I would be surprised if this is a coincidence. This behavior points strongly to a connection with the Mctrain group of socks and given long history of attempted misdirection I think this is another case of safe than sorry. --Daniel J. Leivick (talk) 19:03, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
- I/we all appreciate your interest and attempts to secure validity across Wikipedia, but when I last looked at that article, there was nothing about Ferrari in it- what was there when I last looked at it was valid- I would also not go so far as to say that I am an expert, and that is why I never really did major editing to any article of Wiki, just some links and that sort of stuff, and much talk- I said that I knew much about that family since being a student at Northwestern in Chicago, originally I was from the east cost and attended the same almamater as Conan O'Brien, I knew Actress Amiee Garcia who also attended Northwestern and the same Chicago high school as some of the Barbaro family's members. Amiee's high school is a big deal in Chicago and very famous in the city, and the Barbaro family is a big hitter in Chicago- kind of like the Marshal Field family was- I know that some were involved with the Chicago Commmercial Club, I'm not sure if that is the proper name, but that was the club that worked with the Delano family of FDR and Julius Rosenwald, I think, who started the Field Museum of Natural History and the Museum of Science and Industry- the club was also important for the Burnham Plan of organizing Chicago etc, but I digress. I no nothing about Ferrari involvement, and that was not in the article when I last looked at it, so that was already removed. I feel comfortable to verify what is accurate, but I do not feel qualified to add anything more to it or to turn a redlink into a blue Chiboyers (talk) 19:26, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
If you want the Barbaro family article to stay shortened- than just say so, I can verify that the lenghty version was quite excellent, valid and well sourced- you don't have to block me though.Chiboyers (talk) 19:37, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Chiboyers (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Notes:
- In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
- Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.
If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:
{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2= Guys, you are just making up excuses now- and it is quite clear that you must have long been blocking several people unjustly- I have a history of fine editing, and only addressed one controversial topic, circumcision, that is a topic that is still being contested by those engaged on that page's talk page right now. I have even had other editors, like garycomputergeek, that has even sided with me on that article's lack of neutrality and came to my defense. Now, I really don't get what kind of show you guys are running here- and I still don't even get what your "hoax" is suppose to be- but if you are here to just make excuses for your poor choices- please spare us all and just unblock me to not waste anymore of my time. You go remove all of this valuable information on an important historical topic, based on some "Ferrari point" that I don't even understand how it pertains to the Barbaro family, which didn't even have anything of that sort in the article when I last saw it- so I don't get what the issue still is. Then, you say this McTrain individual is the "hoaxer", and I go look at his contributions and that user has a long valid recording of solid, mainly historical, editing contributions- that user was a dedicated contributer to Wiki, not a hoaxer by anything that I can see. Then, I tell you that what is on the Barbaro family page is valid- and you instist that there is a "hoax" with it, that clearly doesn't exist, and I respond to you that if you desire to have that article remain shortened, lacking valid info, than just say so- its a stupid choice, but fine with me, no sweat off my back- so what is the new issue now? Do you just enjoy hasseling people- is this some sort of power trip or something- I don't get all of this, and I sure don't get what this " Ferrari hoax" is suppose to be, but childish games are boaring. |3 = ~~~~}}
If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.
{{unblock reviewed |1= Guys, you are just making up excuses now- and it is quite clear that you must have long been blocking several people unjustly- I have a history of fine editing, and only addressed one controversial topic, circumcision, that is a topic that is still being contested by those engaged on that page's talk page right now. I have even had other editors, like garycomputergeek, that has even sided with me on that article's lack of neutrality and came to my defense. Now, I really don't get what kind of show you guys are running here- and I still don't even get what your "hoax" is suppose to be- but if you are here to just make excuses for your poor choices- please spare us all and just unblock me to not waste anymore of my time. You go remove all of this valuable information on an important historical topic, based on some "Ferrari point" that I don't even understand how it pertains to the Barbaro family, which didn't even have anything of that sort in the article when I last saw it- so I don't get what the issue still is. Then, you say this McTrain individual is the "hoaxer", and I go look at his contributions and that user has a long valid recording of solid, mainly historical, editing contributions- that user was a dedicated contributer to Wiki, not a hoaxer by anything that I can see. Then, I tell you that what is on the Barbaro family page is valid- and you instist that there is a "hoax" with it, that clearly doesn't exist, and I respond to you that if you desire to have that article remain shortened, lacking valid info, than just say so- its a stupid choice, but fine with me, no sweat off my back- so what is the new issue now? Do you just enjoy hasseling people- is this some sort of power trip or something- I don't get all of this, and I sure don't get what this " Ferrari hoax" is suppose to be, but childish games are boaring. |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}
If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:
{{unblock reviewed |1= Guys, you are just making up excuses now- and it is quite clear that you must have long been blocking several people unjustly- I have a history of fine editing, and only addressed one controversial topic, circumcision, that is a topic that is still being contested by those engaged on that page's talk page right now. I have even had other editors, like garycomputergeek, that has even sided with me on that article's lack of neutrality and came to my defense. Now, I really don't get what kind of show you guys are running here- and I still don't even get what your "hoax" is suppose to be- but if you are here to just make excuses for your poor choices- please spare us all and just unblock me to not waste anymore of my time. You go remove all of this valuable information on an important historical topic, based on some "Ferrari point" that I don't even understand how it pertains to the Barbaro family, which didn't even have anything of that sort in the article when I last saw it- so I don't get what the issue still is. Then, you say this McTrain individual is the "hoaxer", and I go look at his contributions and that user has a long valid recording of solid, mainly historical, editing contributions- that user was a dedicated contributer to Wiki, not a hoaxer by anything that I can see. Then, I tell you that what is on the Barbaro family page is valid- and you instist that there is a "hoax" with it, that clearly doesn't exist, and I respond to you that if you desire to have that article remain shortened, lacking valid info, than just say so- its a stupid choice, but fine with me, no sweat off my back- so what is the new issue now? Do you just enjoy hasseling people- is this some sort of power trip or something- I don't get all of this, and I sure don't get what this " Ferrari hoax" is suppose to be, but childish games are boaring. |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}
I