User talk:TheOleRazzleDazzle

June 2023

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text at the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 20:54, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbb23: Can I get clarification on what I did to get my account blocked? TheOleRazzleDazzle (talk) 18:16, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS appeal #75328

is closed. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 22:00, 26 June 2023 (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).

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

Request reason:

I am requesting my account to be unblocked. The reason I was blocked was that my actions demonstrated I was not here to build a Wikipedia site as consistent with the protocols required as a Wikipedia user. I had used my user-space as an area to continually work on my article that I had intended to submit for a live article. I treated the user-space as a draft and continually edited without submitting it as a live article. In addition, I created additional sub user-spaces to save prior drafts of the article I had intended to submit live which is also wrong. After reviewing Wikipedia articles and policies, I realize now that my actions were not in accordance with how users are supposed to contribute and build articles for Wikipedia. I understand why my account was blocked and understand the administrator was in his or right to block my account based on my actions. I believe I should be unblocked as now I fully understand how users are supposed to use their user-space and contribute to Wikipedia. If unblock, I will not be using my user-space as any long-term draft space where I don’t submit a live article. I intend to user my user space for a Wikipedia project and not treat it like a free web host. I will not create sub-user spaces to save drafts of my article. In addition, if there is something I am unsure of I will review articles or reach out for admins for assistance.

Decline reason:

No reply to the question below. A reply to this is required before an unblock can be considered. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 05:07, 10 July 2023 (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 UTRS request referred to "we" and "our". Who is "we"? 331dot (talk) 08:42, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

TheOleRazzleDazzle, Centralcoe: According to a sockpuppetry investigation, you have created a second account to evade this block. I have put the case on hold, pending answers from you. In your new account, you have disclosed a conflict of interest. It looks like this is a paid role. Paid editing (policy here) is not forbidden, but it is mandatory to "disclose who is paying you to edit (your "employer"), who the client is, and any other relevant role or relationship". You can do it using the {{Paid}} template in your user page. We expect a high degree of transparency from paid editors. I am not an administrator, but I would suggest you to stop using the new account and appeal here, with a fully transparent disclosure of any paid role, as well as an acknowledgement of the policy on the use of multiple accounts and paid editing. Pinging 331dot and Seraphimblade who might be interested in following up. MarioGom (talk) 20:41, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@MarioGom: After no response was received from Bbb23 and the original page remained blocked, a new page was created so that the page could include the disclosure and further progress. Rather than trying to evade the block, this was an attempt at continued communication so that the page would conform to Wikipedia requirements based on the feedback provided by administrators. Should administrators direct continuing with the original page, then the page would need to be unblocked in order to add the desired disclosure. What are the recommended next steps forward? TheOleRazzleDazzle (talk) 23:15, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

TheOleRazzleDazzle: You can appeal again. The last appeal above was not considered because 331dot's question was not answered: Your UTRS request referred to "we" and "our". Who is "we"?. This question is relevant to two policies: Role accounts, shared by multiple people, are not allowed. And paid editing policy requires a clear disclosure that the contributions are paid (if that is the case), the employer, the client, and any intermediary (for example, if this is contracted through a marketing agency). MarioGom (talk) 06:31, 25 August 2023 (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).

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

Request reason:

I am requesting my account to be unblocked. The original reason my account was blocked was that my actions demonstrated I was not here to build a Wikipedia site as consistent with the protocols required as a Wikipedia user. I had used my user-space as an area to continually work on my article that I had intended to submit for a live article. I treated the user-space as a draft and continually edited without submitting it as a live article. In addition, I created additional sub user-spaces to save prior drafts of the article I had intended to submit live which is also incorrect. In response to our appeal, @331dot: asked why my UTRS request referred to "we" and "our". (Who is "we"?) A response was not given in time and our appeal was closed. Subsequently, I was unsure on how to proceed after our appeal was closed. I created a second account with the intention of creating an article with full COI disclosures in response to the “who is we” inquiry posed by 331dot. I placed a COI on the second account (@Centralcoe:) and the article I was drafting. It was brought to my attention by @MarioGom: that creating a second account is inappropriate and I should proceed with the appeal in the original account. Therefore, I am requesting unblocking my original account so I can proceed with finishing the article. I will place COI disclosures on my account. In addition, I will add the COI disclosures to the talk page of the article. I will deactivate the 2nd account, if that is recommended. My goal is to create a quality bankruptcy court page as part of the Court’s outreach efforts. Here is the COI disclosure I plan on using: “As part of the Court’s outreach efforts, as a clerk for the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California, I am contributing information that will improve the quality of bankruptcy court-related pages. I am aware of Wikipedia’s policies and guidelines, and I will abide by them. If you would like to contact me, please leave a message on my talk page.”199.107.16.131 (talk) 23:03, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

No response to below in a week. — Daniel Case (talk) 05:42, 12 September 2023 (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 request was made by an IP. If it was you, remember to log in before posting. 331dot (talk) 23:07, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot: Yes, I forgot to login before posting the appeal. Do I need to do anything further? TheOleRazzleDazzle (talk) 23:12, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This unblock request still used a plural pronouns ("after our appeal was closed.") How many people have access to this account? Z1720 (talk) 23:48, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Z1720: I am the builder of the page and have access to the account. Any content updates I have it reviewed with court staff for grammar and accuracy. Are there any additional steps we should take as to getting my account unblocked? TheOleRazzleDazzle (talk) 16:19, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

TheOleRazzleDazzle: To spare you some back and forth: Shared accounts are not allowed, and each account belongs to a single individual, not an organization. The User:TheOleRazzleDazzle account belongs to you (singular), not the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California. You can review content with colleagues within your organization, but if any of them wants to edit Wikipedia directly, they must register their own individual account (and disclose their COI there). This appeal is made by you (singular), so every time you say we or us, there might be confusion about whether you (singular) understand and comply with this policy. MarioGom (talk) 17:04, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Daniel Case: Hi, can I get clarification for declining the appeal. I wasn't aware there was a pending response needed. I responded to @Z1720: inquiry and then @MarioGom: followed up with a clarification. Was there something more I was supposed to do after that? I am just trying to add information about the bankruptcy court. What is the next step that I need to do? TheOleRazzleDazzle (talk)

Well, we have a lot that just sit there after someone's asked something and doesn't respond. Last night (well, early this morning my time) I closed a bunch, some of which had gone almost two months without a response. I suppose what we just want is unequivocal clarification from you that there is a single person in control of this account. Daniel Case (talk) 20:39, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the response. Yes, I control this account. TheOleRazzleDazzle (talk) 20:46, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Case, so does this mean I would have to open a new appeal?TheOleRazzleDazzle (talk)

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).

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

Request reason:

I am requesting my account to be unblocked. My account was blocked because I had used my user-space as an area to continually work on my article that I had intended to submit for a live article. I treated the user-space as a draft and continually edited without submitting it as a live article. In addition, I created additional sub user-spaces to save prior drafts of the article. Also, I created a second account with the intention of creating an article with full COI disclosures. I placed a COI on the second account (@Centralcoe:) and the article I was drafting. It was brought to my attention that creating a second account is inappropriate and I should proceed with the appeal in the original account. Therefore, I am requesting unblocking this account so I can proceed with finishing the article. I will place COI disclosures on my account. In addition, I will add the COI disclosures to the talk page of the article and deactivate the 2nd account. This account is my account and I only have access to it. My goal is to create a quality bankruptcy court page as part of the Court’s outreach efforts. TheOleRazzleDazzle (talk) 21:42, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Please see below. Z1720 (talk) 17:07, 11 December 2023 (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.

@Daniel Case: Hi Daniel, any chance you could assist in someone to look at my appeal above?TheOleRazzleDazzle (talk)

You've done all you can, really. It's in the matrix at CAT:RFU; I can't review it by custom since I've already reviewed the one above, even if just to say you had gone too long without responding to the query. Just be patient, is all I can say. Daniel Case (talk) 21:46, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

From my understanding of the above, you created User:Centralcoe on July 10, after this account was blocked. Is that correct? Z1720 (talk) 22:33, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that is correct. It didn't seem like I was able to resolve anything through the appeal for this account and I thought at the time it was better to start fresh with a new account. TheOleRazzleDazzle (talk) 16:55, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for telling us about this alternate account. Creating an account while blocked and editing with it is considered block evasion and severely frowned upon on Wikipedia. If an admin discovered that you using an account while blocked, it could lead to administrators refusing to consider an unblock for an extended period of time (usually six months per the standard offer). Since you told us about the account, I will count the six months starting from User:Centralcoe's last edit, which is August 9. Please wait until Feb. 9 to make a new unblock request. I am also going to block the Centralcoe account as a sock puppet. Are there any other accounts we should be aware of? Z1720 (talk) 17:07, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. There are no other accounts. TheOleRazzleDazzle (talk) 21:29, 23 February 2024 (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).

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

Request reason:

I am requesting the unblocking of my account. I understand that my previous actions, including treating the Wikipedia user-space as a draft area and creating an alternate account, violated Wikipedia's policies. I sincerely apologize for my misunderstanding of what is permitted when using Wikipedia. I have learned from this setback. My intention has not been malicious. I created the alternate account in my pursuit of creating an article about the United States Bankruptcy Court - Central District of California. My first account was locked due to using the space while working on a draft, and I recognize that creating a separate account was ill-advised. I appreciate the guidance I received to proceed with the appeal through this (original) account. If unblocked, I am committed to creating a high-quality article about the United States Bankruptcy Court - Central District of California that adheres to Wikipedia's neutrality and verifiability guidelines. I will disclose any potential conflicts of interest transparently using the COI template on the article's talk page. My goal is to create a quality bankruptcy court page. Wikipedia pages of other bankruptcy courts are not fully fleshed out as compared to their District Court counterparts. I am creating a more comprehensive page for the Central District’s bankruptcy court and would like to proceed with the page, if possible. Please let me know how to proceed so that the Wikipedia page that I created about the Bankruptcy Court may be unblocked. Thank you. TheOleRazzleDazzle (talk) 4:30 pm, 23 February 2024, Friday (17 days ago) (UTC−5)

Decline reason:

per discussion with blocking admin. Please find another topic to write about. Thanks -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:26, 11 March 2024 (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.

Unblock discussion

@Bbb23: What say ye? Unblock or decline? Choose a different subject? -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 11:49, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Deepfriedokra: It's obvious the user is not interested in a different subject. Emphatically decline. The user has no place on Wikipedia.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:40, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]