User talk:OSUHEY

Little context in 158 Chittenden[edit]

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on 158 Chittenden, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because 158 Chittenden is very short providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting 158 Chittenden, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 22:31, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with File:ChrisWidener.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:ChrisWidener.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 14:59, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:CapriCafaro2.jpg[edit]

File Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:CapriCafaro2.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. — neuro^(talk) 23:18, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Jim Hughes (Ohio Politician)[edit]

A tag has been placed on Jim Hughes (Ohio Politician) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. TheDude2006 (talk) 23:45, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Karen Gillmor[edit]

A tag has been placed on Karen Gillmor, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing no content to the reader. Please note that external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article don't count as content. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Eeekster (talk) 23:54, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Patton[edit]

A tag has been placed on Tom Patton, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing no content to the reader. Please note that external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article don't count as content. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Eeekster (talk) 23:55, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your pages[edit]

Hi OSUHEY. It looks like the two pages marked for speedy deletion above have some sort of problem related to the navbox template, which you seem to have copied directly into the text rather than just referenced with the double braces. I removed the tags to give you a bit of time to fix them. §FreeRangeFrog 00:01, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with File:SenStewart.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:SenStewart.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 00:54, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with File:BillHarris.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:BillHarris.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 06:29, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ohio senators[edit]

Thanks for your work on articles for Ohio senators. You may wish to familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's templates and navboxes. Using them allows you to repeat information without having to reenter it on each page. As an example, I created Template:Members of the Ohio Senate and placed it on the article you started for Nina Turner. Please use it in the other articles. Thanks again, and please let me know if you have any questions. - Eureka Lott 01:48, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problems with Barbara Boyd[edit]

Hello. Concerning your contribution, Barbara Boyd, please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.house.state.oh.us/index.php?option=com_displaymembers&task=detail&district=09. As a copyright violation, Barbara Boyd appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Barbara Boyd has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message.

If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:

If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Barbara Boyd and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Barbara Boyd with a link to where we can find that note.
If you hold the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Barbara Boyd.

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you. I am also marking all the other pages you copy+pasted from that site. Doodle77 (talk) 23:23, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

March 2009[edit]

Please do not add copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. We appreciate contributions on notable individuals, but unfortunately we cannot accept text from copyrighted sources without verification of permission. Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 23:28, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem: Joe Schiavoni[edit]

We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Joe Schiavoni, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a copy from http://www.progressohio.org/page/community/post/daveharding/C2Mt, and therefore a copyright violation. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL), versions 1.3 or later then you should do one of the following:

If you have permission from the author leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Joe Schiavoni and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or that the material is released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Joe Schiavoni with a link to where we can find that note.
If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Joe Schiavoni.

It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Joe Schiavoni saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 23:56, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Wagoner is in similar condition, as it seems to draw substantial text from this source, while Kirk Schuring copies from [1] and Ron Amstutz draws from [2]. Also see: Randy Gardner, Kenny Yuko, Sandra Williams, Michael DeBose. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 00:26, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blanking content[edit]

Additionally, please do not overwrite valid content as you did at Eugene Miller. If you wish to create a new article for a specific Eugene Miller, you will have to provide a distinct, "disambiguated" name for him. Since the content you used to erase the disambiguation page was a copyright infringement of this site, which like all other pages in the Ohio government clearly reserves copyright, "Copyright © 2005 - 2009 Ohio House of Representatives", I have deleted your additions and restored the original content. Please see Wikipedia:Disambiguation for more information on how to name an article when there is already something at the primary name. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 00:50, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicated navboxes[edit]

Hi OSUHEY. I just noticed that you've contributed a large navbox "Members of the Ohio House of Representatives" to several different articles, including Dan Stewart, Lou Blessing, and Tyrone Yates. Duplicating identical content in several places is a bad idea, because when that information changes (during elections) it needs to be updated in several places. It's better to place this type of information in a new template and then include that on each page (without subst). Your navbox "Members of the Ohio Senate" has the same problem. Please let me know if you need help with this. Dcoetzee 05:09, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for copyright violation[edit]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for persistently violating our copyright policy, after warning. The articles Seth Morgan (politician) and Peggy Lehner have been deleted under our speedy deletion criterion WP:CSD#G12. As you were advised, house.state.oh.us explicitly reserves copyright, "Copyright © 2005 - 2009 Ohio House of Representatives." Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you continue placing copyrighted text on Wikipedia without verifying permission, you may be blocked indefinitely. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:13, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with File:NinaTurner.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:NinaTurner.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 12:32, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock requests[edit]

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).

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

Request reason:

I'd like to go back to writing good articles pertaining to Ohio politicians, please consider unblocking me- thanks

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 22:57, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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 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).

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

Request reason:

After a year of being blocked, I understand the importance of not infringing upon copy written materials. I hope to be able to continue to contribute on Wikipedia in a constructive manner, where I can share my knowledge by creating and improving upon articles. I am looking forward to becoming a part of the Wikipedia community

Decline reason:

It is Confirmed that you have been socking as recently as two weeks ago. Tiptoety ^talk 02:35, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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.

I also want to add, that as a problem associated with having OSUHEY blocked is that you are now blocking any individual who has contributed to any Ohio politician, and thus have blocked numerous individual who you have mistakenly thought to be me. This is just one more reason in which it would be beneficial to unblock the original account and take my word. OSUHEY (talk) 14:54, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As an aside, I would strongly support an unblock if you did everything outlined at Wikipedia:Standard offer. That is, display behavior that shows you are willing to abide by your initial block for an extended period of time by a) staying away from en.wikipedia for at least 6 months, with no attempts to edit here, at all, from any sock, with no exceptions and b) work on a sister project during that time while obeying the rules and keeping good behavior. If you can do that, I have a strong level of confidence you will be unblocked here as well. All you need to do is show you are willing to play by the rules, which you have not done yet. If you want to be allowed to edit again, just follow that advice, and it will happen. If you continue to use sockpuppets to dodge your initial block, you are going to continue to be stonewalled at every opportunity. If you go away for 6 months and establish a positive reputation at a sister project, you will be back here in good standing. --Jayron32 16:03, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What sister project do you have in mind? As of now, that deal is not on the table. I will abide by the rules if a full block is granted immediately. OSUHEY (talk) 16:20, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever meets your interests. If you speak another language, you could edit at another language Wikipedia. If you only speak English, there are other projects (Wiktionary, Wikinews, Wikiquote, etc.) and there is also Simple English Wikipedia, which is a seperate project from this one based on Simple English. And the deal is absolutely on the table. I just put it there. --Jayron32 16:27, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And now it's off the table. Editing on those would be like searching on Ask Jeeves instead of Google. I would prefer for my contributions to be seen. The choice is clearly in favor of helping you guys' out, I really don't care. Either we can unblock OSUHEY to avoid trying to constantly block socks, and instead patrol for real problems like plagiarism, which I vehemently agree isn't welcome here and should not be tolerated, or continue to deal with new socks. That's you're choice. No six month ban, no sister project edits. That's not a tantrum, that's just the way it will be. You and other admins are obviously more frustrated than I am with being blocked, so I think it is in your best interest (an helpfulness) to allow for the unblocking of OSUHEY. OSUHEY (talk) 16:34, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, I think if you were to look further into the case of OSUHEY, there really is not any disruptive behavior other than initially in my editing career. Almost the entire reason for all of this nonsense has been to sockpuppeting, and most of my edits have been legitimate and meaningful. In all honesty, the blockage and reverting of some of my edits have actually harmed the Wikipedia project. For examples:

Some pages that have been reverted actually have been reverted to incorrect information. User:MarcusQuertus has reverted the Ohio House of Representatives multiple times to incorrect information. If you do not believe me, you can resort to the actual site at www.state.house.oh.us to see that Wikipedia is currently incorrect, but was correct before the reversion.
You have also begun to block innocent users. This, obviously, is against the core principle of Wikipedia, which is that it is a free, community driven encyclopedia. Unblocking OSUHEY would allow for this problem to correct itself.
There is a very good chance that other individuals who are actually harming this site are running aloof due to all of the energy and time focused on trying to decipher my sockpuppets. I actually care about this site, and want to use my institutional knowledge to help others know more about what I am knowledgable in, which is Ohio politicians. Unblocking OSUHEY would allow that to happen as well.

OSUHEY (talk) 16:47, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We do not allow blocked users to edit. Full stop. Likewise, we care more about contributing to an encyclopedia/dictionary/news source/etc. than exposure. I think you seriously need to reexamine your priorities if you wish to edit Wikipedia once more. —Jeremy ^{(v^_^v Contributions)} 20:38, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

I understand why I've been blocked, but I don't think others do. I request an appeal OSUHEY (talk) 16:50, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Look you have had an offer already from User:Jayron32 - Do the Wikipedia:Standard offer - that's your choice if you dismiss that out of hand, and our choice therefore to leave the block in place. If you want to appeal then the procedure is laid out at Wikipedia:Appealing_a_block#Appeal_to_the_Arbitration_Committee Ronhjones ^(Talk) 21:03, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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.

I'm willing to support any suggestion you may have, i.e. I support going back to fix any copyright problems in articles I have contributed to. Regardless, blocking OSUHEY will not have any effect on slowing down my edits. You're literally destroying yourselves... blocking (and now deleting!) articles I have contributed to are greatly hampering the ability for others to gather information and therefore are severely harming the project. You're all going to come back with that and say that it's ME that is harming the project, when it is really the admin's who are making it difficult for others to gather factual, up-to-date information on dozens upon dozens of articles on Ohio politicians. I think the choice is clear, unblock OSUHEY and instead look for copyright vios, which I am more than happy to fix... or block OSUHEY and continue to search for sockpuppet upon sockpuppet, revert edits, and destroy the integrity of any article on an Ohio politician. You've already deleted an credible article, totally uprooted up-to-date information on the Ohio House of Representatives, and have hampered the 128th, and 129th Ohio General Assemblies. The facts are clear: you all are making more of a disgrace to Wikipedia than I. OSUHEY (talk) 14:43, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, the Wikipedia:Ignore all rules has been greatly damaged. Once again, if you are worried about copyright infringement on the site due to me, I will fix it. You have already shown one (maybe two) edits from months and months ago that reflected copyright problems. I urge you to show me more. I am more than willing to play by the rules if OSUHEY is brought back into the community. If the main reason you are blocking is due to socks, then I find that incredibly foolish. All can be avoided- both copyright problems, and sockpuppets by just unblocking the original account today! I will be more than happy to fix copyright problems and act as a responsible, knowledgable contributor. Even if for a trial period, I promise I will work diligently to fix copyright problems and act accordingly to wikipedia admin standards. If I fail to do so, I swear to leave Wikipedia forever through a ban on my account. I think a good middle ground has been reached here. OSUHEY (talk) 14:55, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:FuFoFuEd has stated that it is clear that the articles still have problems. Save yourselves the trouble, and let someone who is knowledgable on the topic to fix them. It only makes sense. OSUHEY (talk) 14:57, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

I'll go ahead an put this once more. Please refer to above for my reasonings, Thanks OSUHEY (talk) 15:06, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Since you have, especially in this request, demonstrated no understanding whatsoever of any part of "you must go to ArbCom", I am revoking your talk page access so that you may read that until you do understand without the distraction of filing another request referring to the reasoning of your previous unsuccessful requests in the hope that some admin will take pity on you, and therefore wasting less of our time, and yours. Have a nice day. — Daniel Case (talk) 15:20, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Your ability to edit this talk page during the block has been revoked due to abuse of the unblock template. If you wish to appeal the block further, contact the unblock mailing list at arbcom-llists.wikimedia.org.

Daniel Case (talk) 15:20, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ban discussion[edit]

There is a ban discussion regarding this user at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#User:OSUHEY_ban_discussion. — Jeff G. ツ 19:41, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]