Jump to content

User:Ericsaindon2/Archive 4

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Signpost

[edit]

Generally, we try to cover on-wiki stuff only. Ral315 (talk) 04:40, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Griffith Park

[edit]

Griffith Park is not a neighborhood. It's just a municipal park. I'm not aware of any convention that applies. -Will Beback 05:10, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: Caliber Motors. There is nothing especially notable about this car dealership, and there are no verifiable sources for the material in the article. -Will Beback 05:23, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Re: Pipe trick. Yes. -Will Beback 05:28, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Communities strawpoll

[edit]

You have already been warned once. NEVER, NEVER, NEVER delete or alter the text of another editor in a survey or on talk pages! (re: this edit [1]) There are other ways to fix the auto-numbering--see my edit.

As for completely stopping any edit wars/page move wars/interminable arguments on talk pages on the naming of community articles, or city articles--it is NEVER going to completely stop, although it might die down some. Look, for example, at Serge's efforts on naming Chicago at talk:Chicago. We've had, for a very long time, a de facto standard for naming US city articles, and for the few naming disputes that there have been (such as for Los Angeles, California) the consensus has been to keep using the standard. He wasn't happy with that status quo. His modus operandi appears to be to keep creating arguments and surveys until he gets his way. It looks like that is what he has started at La Jolla, California, as well.

[It's a bit like the fact that there are always new editors coming along proposing that we standardize on either American English or British English. The last time someone actually had the audacity to create a poll, the vote was something like 99 to 1 for keeping the current guidelines before it was closed.]

As for your being banned from the Wikipedia: If you want to do productive editing on the Wikipedia, there are some steps that I think you should take that might lower the length of your ban:

  1. Come clean and identify all of the sockpuppets you have been using
  2. Start to show you can work with other editors to help create an accurate, well-referenced Wikipedia by agreeing to delete your latest addition to the Anaheim Hills, Anaheim, California article until you can provide references for all of your data from primary sources that everyone can access (i.e. no fee-based databases such as DataQuick).
    1. Agree that you will do the same with any new data that you add to any Southern California articles.
  3. Do some non-controversial edits on articles that have absolutely nothing to do with Southern California. For example, there are several categories of Articles that need to be wikified, so you might join WikiProject Wikify and help out.
  4. Agree that you will work with a mentor or mentors of the ArbComm's choosing that you will keep in close contact with, and will follow their advice, to keep you out of any additional trouble
  5. Admit to most (and preferably all) of the items listed against you at your RFAR's proposed decision#Proposed findings of fact (Tendentious editing, disruption, vandalism, dishonesty).
  6. QUIT SHOUTING--both in your edit summaries and on talk pages. That is a huge breach of netiquette.

We both live in Southern California--I'm in the Long Beach area. I'm self-employed, so my schedule is flexible. If you want to meet and talk over any of this, or just want to discuss things privately by email, email me, BlankVerse 09:58, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

re: the community strawpoll: It's been announced all over the place and there was a clear date set for the length of the survey. You can't just cancel the survey in the middle, even if it is a muddle (and especially if you don't like the results). Like I said at Wikipedia talk:Communities strawpoll#Community (City, State) Setup--you are just have to let the poll run its course, and if the results are inconclusive, then do it again later with better planning.
And two more suggestions:
  1. Sincerely apologize to arbitrator Fred Bauder for altering his checkuser evidence.
  2. Admit the provenance of File:Caliber Motors.jpg. Will Beback has already compared both images, because as an administrator he can look at deleted images, but it can easily be undeleted so everyone can make their own comparisons and judge for themselves the accuracy of your statements on my user page.
BlankVerse 22:13, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Exceptions

[edit]

The naming conventions are guidelines, not rules written in stone. That means exceptions are permitted, but they must be presented on a case-by-case basis of course. Opposing a vote to make San Francisco an exception because, well, that would make it an exception, doesn't make sense. Does it make sense to you? --Serge 05:35, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

People, places, polls, and 'pologies

[edit]

People are solicitous of the articles about their town, their team, their college, their religion, you name it. It's human nature. That also means that some discussions are dominated by editors who are only concerned with that particular article of the type. Polls are a last resort to determine consensus after a full discussion. They are certainly not an end to themselves. It's more important that we talk about an issue than that we have a poll. I accept your apology and wish you the best. However anymore activity like this will be unforgivable. I have very little patience for hoaxes and plagiarized material. Blankverse has made some wise suggestions for how to move forward into a more positive editing mode. If those are followed then maybe we can all work together more harmoniously. Cheers, -Will Beback 06:27, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Anaheim Hills5555.JPG. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Fritz S. (Talk) 10:25, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Anaheim Hills5555.JPG

[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Anaheim Hills5555.JPG. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Fritz S. (Talk) 10:25, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

world city

[edit]

I hope you're not confusing a world city with a highly-populated city. They don't necessarily line up. --Polaron | Talk 04:32, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

From where are you getting the 2 million population criterion within city limits in order be classified as a world city? --Polaron | Talk 05:38, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Do you have a reference? Arbitrary cut offs are normally associated with an organization which rates cities. Also, there are a quite a few world cities that do not have populations greater than 2 million within their administrative boundaries. Are they automatically excluded by your criterion? --Polaron | Talk 05:46, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Estates

[edit]

I see that you've been using the word "estate" to describe homes in Anaheim. I've changed it on a couple of pages because it isn't really accurate. Although the word is more liberally thrown around in the U.S., it really is defined as an income producing land. It becomes even more incorrect when you see "estate" right next to "mansion."

I've also noticed (as I pointed out to you on the Anaheim Hills talk page) that there aren't citations for a lot of the material related to Anaheim Hills. Although I appreciate your desire to make the information relating to your neighborhood as accurate as possible, some of your edits are overly POV, to the point that it seems as if your goal is more to promote the area than to accurately describe it for an encyclopedia. For instance, there's no reason to point out on the Anaheim page that the demographic data for Anaheim Hills is different, particularly since that's not done for any of the other areas within the city. It comes across as an attempt to say "Anaheim Hills is a great place."

Anyway, let me know if you take issue with any of my changes. JCO312 14:44, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Straw Poll Groupings

[edit]

Out of curiosity, why is Austin listed in the 1 Million+ city group? The page says it has a population of of 690,000. It mentions it's metro area being above 1,000,000, but Boston (metro area of 4,000,000) is listed in the Medium sized one. The Bethling 06:02, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I wasn't suggesting Boston be moved :) Just pointing out a reason why Austin didn't belong in the larger sized group.

Also, technically, Miami is actually under 400,000 people :) The Bethling 06:14, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

How are you defining either significance or how known it is? Those are so subjective that it's just like having no naming convention at all. And the most important category is missing: name ambiguity. Grouping San Jose with Indianapolis makes no sense because San José, Costa Rica is a world capital and Indianapolis is a unique name. —Wknight94 (talk) 11:02, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ericsaindon2

[edit]

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 05:54, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

69.232.53.178

[edit]

Eric: Per your edits as 69.232.53.178 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log): What part of being banned don't you understand? The ArbComm made their ruling. You are completely banned from editing on the Wikipedia. That includes your sockpuppets and your IP edits. You said, at User talk:Jimbo that you "would not violate [the rules] any further." What do you call editing Wikipedia articles while you are banned? BlankVerse 14:47, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Ericsaindon2 Ban

[edit]

re: the message you left at User talk:Jimbo:

[edit]

Jimbo Wales is a very, very busy person. He just finished up with Wikimania 2006 in Boston, and then was in India. Next he was in Hong Kong for the Chinese Wikipedia Conference. He is now in Europe. (You can see his itinerary here.)

You also need to understand that he only gets involved in appeals when there are major disagreements over Wikipedia policy, or it involves something that current policy doesn't cover, or there is a conflict between administrators.

On only a couple of occasions has he unilaterally reversed a ban when the editor has professed a change of attitude. I know that in one of those cases (another Southern Californian) the guy continued to be what seemed to be a fairly minor nuisance (lots of short-term blocks because of edit wars), but just recently he admitted to being a major vandal, so Jimbo is now much less likely to overturn an ArbComm banning. IMHO, there is nothing in your case that would make him reconsider the ban and then overrule the Arbitration Committee.

" If he is willing to discuss this with me instead of hiding, then maybe I would abide by the ban"
maybe...?
With an attitude like that, you won't get anyone to listen to you. The Wikipedia has dealt with editors who have been greater problems than you. I suggest that you don't go down that path.
If you want to be an editor on the Wikipedia and be a respected contributor and a member of the Wikipedia community, you are going to have to show some contrition instead of acting like a spoiled brat.

Why have none of the other Wikipedia editors been willing to spend time explaining things to you recently? Because in the beginning, they all did spend lots of time with you assuming good faith on talk:Anaheim Hills, Anaheim, California and on various user talk pages explaining things to you. How did you repay them? By being a disruptive, unyielding pain-in-the-ass who became such a problem that they filed a RFC and then a RFAR against you.

Why am I still trying to help you? Because through most of the Sturm und Drang that you were causing, I was doing very little editing on the Wikipedia while I was looking after my father while he was under hospice care.

re: your change of behavior:

[edit]

Even though you did make some effort to change, in my opinion it was only after it was very clear that the Arbitration Committee was going to rule against you. Up to that point, you were still regularly violating Wikipedia policy, including evading your previous one-month ban. Since your current ban started you have been involved in page move wars and violated Wikipedia copyright policies, among other things.

The biggest thing, however, is that the change in your behavior does not make up for, nor erase your past editing misbehavior. I agree with everything that the Arbitration Committee ruled on in your RFAR. And, quite frankly, if the direction the ArbComm was going to rule wasn't already very clear, I was prepared to add additional evidence of your misbehavior and your violations of Wikipedia Rules and Guidelines.

Originally I would have said that a one year ban was probably too long, but when you showed no repentance for your misbehavior, and when you so blatantly violated the one-month ban, I then changed my mind and decided that the one year ban was appropriate.

re: My suggestions:

[edit]

You didn't do half of those suggestions. Even your apology for the copyright violation on Image:Caliber Motors.jpg was to the wrong person (although Will did acknowledge your apology). It was me that you lied to on my talk page and who should have received an apology, and it was the ArbComm that you should also have apologized to as well as a surrogate for the Wikipedia community. Your actions were basically a case of too little, too late.

re: Your one-year ban: Accept it.

[edit]

Being banned means that you, the person, is banned, and not just your current user name. It also means that anytime that it is discovered that you have tried to circumvent the ban by using sockpuppets or IP edits, the ban will be reset (see [2]).

Here are some Wikipedia Policies and guidelines that you should study carefully:

  • Wikipedia:Banning policy
    "It is customary for the "ban timer" to be reset when a banned user attempts to edit in spite of the ban."
    "Any edits made in defiance of a ban may be reverted to enforce the ban, regardless of the merits of the edits themselves"
  • Wikipedia:Sock puppetry
    "Users who are banned or blocked from editing may not use sock puppets to circumvent this. Evading a block or ban causes the timer on the block to restart, and may further lengthen it."
  • Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion
    CSD-5: "Pages created by banned users while they were banned" will be speedy deleted.

re: Your recent edits:

[edit]

Like I said above, if you continue the way that you have been going, you will definitely get your RFAR reopened and you will be banned for life. There is also the possibility that complaints will be made to your ISP regarding your behavior. If you want to talk about some of this more privately, you can use the e-mail this user link on my user page.

A suggestion: You are only banned from the English-language Wikipedia. You might consider editing on the for awhile. First, study all the Wikipedia Policies and guidelines, as well as the Wikipedia Manual of Style, plus the additional for the Simple Wikipedia. You should also go over the findings of the ArbComm in your RFAR so that you can make sure you avoid any of those mistakes.

Next, start editing on any article that you want on the Simple Wikipedia other than articles associated with Southern California. Write about television shows, or some of your hobbies, for example. Look at the pages that have been tagged as , and fix them. Look at , and simplify those pages. There are many more categories of articles on the Simple Wikipedia that need work.

If you can quietly edit on the Simple Wikipedia without problems or conflicts, I will think about asking the ArbComm to shorten your ban. But, you must also completely stop using sockpuppets and anonymous IPs to edit on the English-language Wikipedia as well. BlankVerse 08:15, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

PS: Please consider breaking up your huge text dumps into smaller, more easily read paragraphs.

More edits

[edit]

When are you going to quit lying to everybody? BlankVerse 15:44, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Please

[edit]

Stop using sockpuppets. All it's doing is extending your ban. --Woohookitty(meow) 07:36, 8 September 2006 (UTC)


Advice

[edit]

Eric I still can't figure out your intentions here at Wikipedia. I guess if I were cornered, I would say your intentions were good, but you just don't seem to grasp the spirit of what this project is. If you haven't figured it out on your own by now, I'm not sure I can easily explain it to you. I obviously don't know who you are or what you do, but your actions continually bring to mind the image of a spoiled teenage brat stamping his feet when he doesn't get his way. I'm not a parent so I'm just not used to dealing with this, which is why I think there's a failure to communicate. I can see that you have made some well intentioned edits lately, notably with your enthusiasm to participate in the city naming discussions. However, you still seem to not have learned what this is all about, which is clear by your IP edits (and edit summaries) in the more recent days. My advice? Sit back. Wait for Jimbo to reply. If he will, then he will. If he does get involved, it will take him some time to read everything (your talk archives, Anaheim Hills archives, RfC, ArbCom, Evidence, Blankverse's page, Will beback's page, Coolcaesar's page, Mike Dillon's, mine, etc). If he doesn't get involved, then you need to accept the ban. It won't go away, but clearly your attempts at editing are causing your one year ban to reset. The ban will last forever unless you stop editing cold turkey. If your sockpuppets aren't you, then let them deal with the situation.

Since Wikipedia is a lot of fun, I would encourage you to try out the Simple Wikipedia like Blankverse suggested. It's not made for children, but for the vast number of people in the world who speak English as a second language and have difficulty with the main encyclopedia. Create a user there (call him Ericsaindon2 even) and show that you do mean well. I have said all along to you that if you begin editing contructively, you will gain acceptance very rapidly. I noticed you were beginning to earn a little community respect with your enthusiasm with the city naming discussions.

Conclusion: Hold off on all edits. Work with Simple Wikipedia instead. Check back every so often to see if Jimbo gets involved and then go from there. Otherwise, you have no choice but to wait out your year and the sooner you let it start, the sooner it will be over. Soltras 07:59, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

User:XClyn

[edit]

Regarding User:XClyn (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Only because of the X at the beginning of the user name and the fact that they did some edits to Canyon High School (Anaheim, California), I am wondering if it could be User:XSG. BlankVerse 15:53, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Jimmy Wales

[edit]

Jimmy Wales is the co-founder and chairman of the Board of Wikia a multi-million dollar for-profit corporation [21]. He is also the co-founder of the nonprofit Wikipedia and chairman of the Board of Trustees for the Wikimedia Foundation [22].

Just for the English-language Wikipedia there are over 1,000 administrators. The next 13 largest Wikipedias add over 1,000 more administrators. Then consider the fact that there are over 150 Wikipedias, over 50 Wiktionaries, over 30 Wikiquotes, over 45 Wikibooks, a number of Wikisources and Wikinews, Wikispecies, the Meta Wiki and the Wikimedia Commons. [23] [24] Even the smallest of those Wikis has 1-10 administrators. There are currently almost 3,000 administrators just for the different Wikipedias [25]. Keep in mind that those are just the administrators, and there are many more editors who regularly edit on the Wikipedia who are not administrators [26] (for example, I'm not an administrator, but I have over 10,000 edits in over 18 months.)

Ask yourself: Does the head of a large regional American Red Cross chapter usually get involved in problems with a single volunteer. Or does the superintendent of a large school district normally get involved in the suspension of a single student. Since nobody else is protesting your yearlong banishment, and the ban does not involve any change in Wikipedia policy, I think that you are being very unrealistic in expecting a personal response from Jimmy Wales.

FYI: The sorts of things that he might get involved in would include the recent controversial approval [27] of the restoration of adminship for User:Carnildo. If it looks like that storm is going to blow over, however, he may not even get involved in that case. BlankVerse 19:11, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

About User:XClyn

[edit]

As far as User:XClyn is concerned, I find no evidence that this person is you. Looking at all of this user's edits so far, all I see is that this person claimed to be you on his user page, vandalised Northern Ireland and User talk:Will Beback. User:Netsnipe even protected XClyn's user page to prevent him from claiming that you were you.[28]

However, I would like to echo User:BlankVerse and eveybody else who has recently chimed in and recommend you stop editing until your ban by ArbCom has ended. Otherwise they might ban you for life. Wikipedia is going to be around in a year, and the attitude around here may change, and more established users who have gained trust with others in the community might start to agree with you (And yes I will admit that I am not a big fan of the current naming of the La Jolla and Hollywood articles). So ask yourself: can you afford to take that risk? Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 05:14, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Canyon Hills

[edit]

I'm sorry, I cannot do that. It'd be wrong to claim your edits as my own, as that's plagiarism to begin with. Please just sit out your arbcom ban and come back and edit constructively. Focus on other things instead of having your block extended another day each time you come back and evade it. It's obvious that you care for your community, but Wikipedia has rules about these things. Ryūlóng 05:31, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Since it's apparent that you're not willing to accept your ban, I thought it was worth pointing out that changing the Canyon high school page so that the address includes "Anaheim Hills" is a pretty outrageous edit. You've admitted that the Post Office doesn't recognize Anaheim Hills, so why the location included (which is simply the address) should violate that rule is beyond me. JCO312 21:43, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Give it up

[edit]

Eric, it is time to just give it up. All of your edits are going to be reverted and all of your sockpuppets will be blocked as soon as you use them. There are just too many people aware of the situation for you to fool anyone. Just end your crusade before things get really serious and you are banned indefinitely and someone files a complaint with your ISP for abuse. Or even worse, someone might use public records to get ahold of your parents and let them know of the situation. It is a shame to see things deteriorate this badly, but it looks like that is where things are headed. My suggestion is to just stop editing and come back in a year. When you come back, start fresh and be a reasonable person who works with the community to try and solve your differences instead of going against the community every chance you get. This whole game isn't worth it. Nobody enjoys banning a contributor who is so passionate and dedicated, but sometimes there is little other choice. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 00:54, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Density OC.JPG listed for deletion

[edit]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Density OC.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in its not being deleted. Thank you. —Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr.) 21:02, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:AnaheimHillsDemographics.JPG listed for deletion

[edit]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:AnaheimHillsDemographics.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in its not being deleted. Thank you. —Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr.) 00:51, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:Anaheim Hills 6.jpg listed for deletion

[edit]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Anaheim Hills 6.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in its not being deleted. Thank you. —Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr.) 00:53, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:L welcome pagestack1 006.jpg listed for deletion

[edit]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:L welcome pagestack1 006.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in its not being deleted. Thank you. —Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr.) 00:53, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Community ban

[edit]

Image:Ahills2.JPG listed for deletion

[edit]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Ahills2.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. MECU≈talk 03:34, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Merger proposed: Dove Canyon → Dove Canyon, California

[edit]

It has been proposed to merge the content of Dove Canyon into Dove Canyon, California. Since you have previously edited one of these articles, I thought you might be interested. You're welcome to participate in the discussion if you like. --B. Wolterding 10:07, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Ericsaindon2/Archive_4&oldid=1142060221"