User talk:Senecaminor

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. The thread is Alfred-Maurice de Zayas. The discussion is about the topic Alfred-Maurice de Zayas. Thank you. —Hegsareta (talk) 04:20, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Signature in article

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I've noticed that you have been adding your signature to some of your edits to articles, such as the edit you made to Franz Schubert. This is a common mistake to make and has probably already been corrected. Please do not sign your edits to article content, as the article's edit history serves the function of attributing contributions, so you only need to use your signature to make discussions more readable, such as on article talk pages or project pages such as the Village Pump. If you would like further information about distinguishing types of pages, please see What is an article? Again, thank you for contributing, and enjoy your Wikipedia experience! Thank you. Toccata quarta (talk) 10:02, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Minor edits

Thank you for your contributions. Please mark your edits as "minor" only if they are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. Toccata quarta (talk) 14:08, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

February 2020

Hello, I'm SNUGGUMS. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 22:33, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are suspected of sockpuppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, then, if you wish to do so, respond to the evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/CubaHavana2018. Thank you. NoonIcarus (talk) 03:25, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:CubaHavana2018 per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/CubaHavana2018. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. -- RoySmith (talk) 16:00, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Roy Smith I am an infrequent Wikipedia user and an infrequent editor -- as you can see, I am mostly interested in literature and music and most of my entries are on such issues. I just learned today that my account had been blocked as a so-called sockpuppet. I respectfully ask that the block be lifted. Please take a look at my edits -- which have always followed Wiki standards and are well sourced. I see that the entry "Alfred de Zayas" seems to be the problem -- I follow the de Zayas blog, which I consider highly informative and always substantiated. I also follow him on twitter and consider him one of the most independent and straight-forward UN rapporteurs. OK, that's my opinion. I see that not only "Senecaminor" has been blocked, but that the article "Alfred de Zayas" itself is also blocked for editing. This is odd, because I see animated activity over the past two months -- additions that are not properly sourced and deletions that are incomprehensible. Two users BobfromBrockley and Noonicarus seem to have it "in" for de Zayas. This does not seem to be very professional nor in the interests of other Wikipedia readers. Moreover, there is an entry about a ridiculous article in a right-wing digital Spanish journal called OKDiario, which is clearly defamatory -- not only of de Zayas but also of Carles Puigdemont. The Wikipedia administrators must look into this. If there were any truth to that, the scandal would certainly have made a splash in the Human Rights Council, in the Geneva Press and the UN would have taken action against de Zayas, who, as we can read in the press and in his blog, continues to participate in the Human Rights Council sessions and in expert meetings published by OHCHR e.g. https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/UCM/expert-consultation-26April2021.pdf see pages 7 and 8. The fact that Senecaminor seems to agree with CubaHavana does not make him into a sockpuppet. Senecaminor is entitled to an opinion, which not surprisingly coincides with that of other users. In any event, Senecaminor has not introduced any false information or biased information into the Wikipedia -- not into the Zayas article nor into the entries on Groucho Marx, Richard Strauss, Gustav Mahler etc. Senecaminor was being helpful by removing defamatory information and by adding necessary nuances. Senecaminor (talk) 18:06, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GeneralNotability, you had a different opinion from me at the SPI, so figured you'd be interested in this. Also, Oshwah, perhaps your CU goggles could be of use here, before CubaHavana2018 goes stale? -- RoySmith (talk) 18:16, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@RoySmith: The accounts appear technically

Unrelated.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:47, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ponyo, Thank you for checking. Based on that, I'm going to back out my blocks of both Senecaminor and CubaHavana2018. I'm leaving the WP:ECP on Alfred-Maurice de Zayas, which should cut down on the edit warring and POV pushing. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:45, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) I should mention that these request comes after today Senecaminor made additional changes in the Spanish version of the article ([1][2]) and that the administrative measures taken here in the English Wikipedia were informed in the Spanish admin noticeboard (Tablón de anuncios de los bibliotecarios/Miscelánea/Alfred-Maurice de Zayas). If a look is taken to the account's edits in the Spanish Wikipedia, one will notice that it has edited almost entirely in De Zayas' article since January 2020, compared to the English Wikipedia.

Naturally, it isn't forbidden to edit exclusively in a single page, but I thought it was important to offer this context if there's going to be a further behavior analysis. --NoonIcarus (talk) 20:29, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]