User talk:Montgomery

Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, Montgomery! I am Terrillja and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page or by typing {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! 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! Oh yeah, I almost forgot, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!

Terrillja _talk 23:58, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Montgomery. You have new messages at Terrillja's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Terrillja _talk 21:03, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your free 1-year HighBeam Research account is ready

Good news! You are approved for access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research.

Account activation codes have been emailed.
To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1
The 1-year, free period begins once you enter the code.
If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:HighBeam/Citations.
HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
Show off your HighBeam access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/highbeam_userbox}} on your userpage
When the 1-year period is up, check the applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi^{t | c} 04:45, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter

Books and Bytes

Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013

by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs)

Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...

New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian

Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.

New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??

New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges

News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY

Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions

New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration

Read the full newsletter

Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 19:57, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library Survey

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi^{t | c} 14:49, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:74.12.123.253

Just wanted to let you know that users are permitted to remove almost anything (including block notices) from their own talk page. Please see WP:BLANKING. If you continue to revert, you'll be violating the three revert rule. - Frood (talk!) 00:11, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Frood: my reversions cannot be considered a violation of 3RR just because the anonymous user is in fact a vandal (you can reed Wikipedia:Edit_warring#Exemptions). He has been globally blocked dozen of times that it means he is ignoring all the warnings. Montgomery (talk) 08:47, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's not vandalism. The page I linked specifically says Policy does not prohibit users, whether registered or unregistered, from removing comments from their own talk pages, although archiving is preferred. If a user removes material from their user page, it is normally taken to mean that the user has read and is aware of its contents. There is no need to keep them on display, and usually users should not be forced to do so. It is often best to simply let the matter rest if the issues stop. If they do not, or they recur, then any record of past warnings and discussions can be found in the page history if ever needed, and these diffs are just as good evidence of previous matters if needed, and Note: Restoring talk page notices, even if they should not be removed, is not a listed exception to the three-revert rule. - Frood (talk!) 20:18, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:11, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

December 2019

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to User talk:74.12.120.154, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. User:Frood has already clearly explained this to you. Editors, including IP editors, are allowed to remove almost anything from their talk pages. There are very limited exceptions, none of which apply to the material removed form this page. A block message, even an active one, may be removed. You are not allowed to restore the material. Leave it alone. Meters (talk) 21:25, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Meters: Hi. I'm just reverting *all* edits from an cross-wiki vandal in *all* projects and *all* namespaces, a vandal who has been causing a lot of problems for months (or years, who knows). With all my respect, I really think that it's a waste of time discussing about if I should revert his edits on his userpage or not. I also gave my reasons to Frood and they remain the same. Montgomery (talk) 19:48, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Was the IP blocked after an SPI? If not you seem to be making an assumption that this is the same user. You gave no reason for your revert. IPs are allowed to blank block notices on English Wikipedia, and restoring them is not an exemption to 3RR, as you have already been told. If your only interest in English Wikipedia is to restore IPs' talk page block notices you should probably just stop editing WEnglish Wikipedia and let it be. Meters (talk) 20:04, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I told you. I'm reverting a vandal in all projects not just here. Take a look outside English Wikipedia and see what's going on. Thousands of vandals and a big effort is made every day to stop them. And you are talking me about stopping editing in this project. Well... Montgomery (talk) 20:13, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Verificación de cuentas

Hola, disculpa que te moleste; pero el día de hoy ha resultado un imprevisto, y que me molesta un tanto. No sé si conozcas o sepas de mí caso, pero actualmente estoy expulsado de la Wikipedia en Español, pero contribuyo aquí, y justamente hoy al despertar procedí a entrar a Wikipedia en inglés como hago habitualmente y me percaté de una notificación dejada por el bibliotecario Eduardosalg en mi página de discusión, en la cual él alega que evadí bloqueo a través de la cuenta Gracrys, y esto con base a que un CU confirmó tal asunto. Revisando a los pocos checkuser que están en eswiki, te vi a ti y a Bernard que son los más activos. Por eso te pido a ti o a Bernard si ven este mensaje que atiendan a mi solicitud de verificación ya que Eduardo ni por el mínimo interés acudió a WP:SVU para pedir una verificación de cuentas formalmente, por ende, dudo mucho de sus criterios o de quién pudo haber afirmado tal cosa. Como se puede ver en todo este hilo, él usuario comenzó presumiendo mala fe desde un principio y alegando que se trataba de un títere de algún usuario experimentado. A esto cabe añadir que también alegaba que la cuenta fue creada recientemente para comentar dicho hilo, pero el usuario Luis1944MX le aclaró que la cuenta llevaba creada desde hace tiempo. No tengo ni la más remota idea de quién sea dicho usuario, ni de porqué Eduardo intenta sabotearme de esta manera, pero no me parece justo tal acto, y más viniendo de un bibliotecario que utilizó un método de verificación muy dudoso. Hace 4 años, el mismo usuario, intentó acusarme de evadir bloqueo. También quiero aclarar algo aquí, en el 2014, Eduardo expulsó a una usuaria, alegando que se trataba de un títere mío, pero luego de una verificación de cuenta, no se pudo comprobar que la cuenta me pertenecía, esta verifiación fue realizada por Edmenb pese a que, Edmenb no aclaró que la cuenta ConnieTM y Kathe gm fueran mías, Eduardo procedió a expulsar a la usuaria sin el más minimo interés de verificar si realmente se trataba de mí, y -jem- es uno de los bibliotecarios que conoce este caso de arbitraje por parte de Eduardo. La usuaria luego de ese trato que recibió prefirió abandonar el proyecto, esto se lo comenté a jem a través de Telegram, quién obviamente en su momento me realizó las respectivas preguntas del porqué conocía a la usuaria, y le di su usuario de Telegram a jem para que la contactará y verificará tal cuestión con ella. Tras estos argumento, pido una verificación entre mi cuenta y la de Gracrys, que sea razonable.Bradford Talk 18:21, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hola, ¿existirá alguna manera de comprobar que la cuenta Gracrys no es mía?, le he mandado un correo a Bernard con mi ubicación exacta, según me recomendó Jem. No creo que funcione. Pero efectivamente la cuenta Gracrys no es mía. Como en la Wikipedia en español solo hay dos checkusers, opté por dirigirme aquí, pero el usuario Sotiale, me indicó que fuera a la "Comisión de defensores del usuario", hasta ahora no he obtenido respuesta alguna de ahí. No puedo aceptar que me achaquen una cuenta que jamás en mí vida utilicé. "Solo porque él usuario es de Venezuela", ¿ese es todo el método que tienen para verificar?, si es por esto, entonces deberían proceder a bloquear a toda Venezuela. Lo siento, pero esto me es totalmente injusto, y las conjeturas de Eduardo están muy fuera de lugar, no sé qué interés podría tener yo en involucrarme en un asunto que no me concierne y más si tengo tiempo sin tener diálogos con este usuario. Si esto se queda así, no me quedará más que pensar que entre Bernard y Eduardosalg hay complot; primero porque ambos se comunicaron de una forma muy extraña, no es incorrecto, pero Bernard llevaba sin editar desde el 20 de marzo, y casualmente apareció para defender el punto del otro usuario, quién acusó e hice acciones sin siquiera aclarar nada, sino hasta que un bibliotecario se lo pidiera. Aunado a esto, Bernard y Eduardo estuvieron de acuerdo a mí expulsión de eswiki, así que con todo esto no puedo pensar más nada. Jem no me dio más opciones y prácticamente entendí que esto se quedará así, y cuando quiera pedir mi desbloqueo dentro de dos meses o tres, usaran esa evasión para justificar un rechazo, no he evadido mi bloqueo en eswiki desde agosto o septiembre si mal no recuerdo, pero está vez si puedo afirmar que no evadí mi bloqueo.Bradford Talk 00:17, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, entonces debo concluir tales razones, esperaré repuesta por parte Meta. Gracias por su tiempo.Bradford Talk 13:00, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Buenos días, solamente para indicar que el bloqueo se hizo en función de WP:Pato. No hay que ver complots que no existen y no andar ensuciando a usuarios; yo no tengo ningún interés en perjudicar a nadie pues no es parte de mis valores como persona. Esta discusión no es para ser usada así y debemos respetar a Montgomery. En todo caso y pase por la mía y discuta ahí y mencione a todos los que desee, para que acuda ahí, en donde ampliaré la información.--Eduardosalg (talk) 17:46, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Baneado

Hola, soy Willy der Kaiser un usuario que has baneado, me gustaría poder volver a editar. He violado algunas normas de la comunidad cuando creé una cuenta llamada Juanfdr- (Moderador). Esa cuenta la había creado para asustar a un usuario llamado Pedritoeldelpitito (es un amigo mío) que se dedica a cambiar mis ediciones, yo no tenia mala intención al crear la cuenta.

También se me acusa de vandalismo, lo cual es falso, no he vandalizado nada, yo me dedico a combatir el vandalismo.

Admito mi error y me gustaría que se me quitase el ban.

--195.53.48.41 (talk) 09:48, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]