User talk:DoriSmith/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 < Archive 1    Archive 2    Archive 3 >
All Pages:  1 -  2 -  3 -  4 -  5 -  6 -  7 -  8 -  9 -  10 -  11 -  12 -  13 -  14 -  15 -  16 -  17 -  18 -  19 -  ... (up to 100)


Sonoma County Airport

Note that I undid your revision. Please refer to the link that I provided regarding talks between the County and Vision Air, which operates from North Las Vegas Airport —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.112.213.29 (talk) 10:37, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When you did that reversion, you removed quite a bit of content, while not adding a whole lot useful. Let's take this discussion over to the article's talk page, okay? Dori (Talk • Contribs) 21:17, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Unnecessary" nbsp

Thanks for explaining the purpose of that nbsp. Stepheng3 (talk) 18:37, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts User:Thomasalazar > User:Diamond Joe Quimby > User:discospinster

Dori,

Back on May 1, you made this edit: Had to say it.

What did you make of the whole User:Thomasalazar > User:Diamond Joe Quimby > User:Discospinster Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts thing?

~ WikiDon (talk) 03:34, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Having taken a look at your case folder (a work in progress?), I think that we're in complete agreement. That was what it smelled like to me as well back then; I just didn't have the time to follow up on it. BTW, I didn't see a reference on your page to this—have you seen it? It might be worth adding as well.
If there's anything I can do to help, please let me know. Dori (Talk • Contribs) 22:31, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that is what happened here, I am certain. If you look at these accounts you seem the very same pattern, add images and questionable content, then when notices are left (either in the article as tags or on the user talk page) they are just deleted until the point at which the user gets tired of them and creates another account to bypass the tags and notices. Then repeats the process all over again. And then when Disco left at Wikietiquette (WE) on Thomasalazer (T(S)A) without any contact Diamond Joe Quimby leaves one on Dicso. Then in the very next stop for DJQ is RfA‎, and then immediately leaves that note on T(S)A. It is the same person talking to himself, no question. I didn't know (although Disco and you might have suspected) that DJQ was apart of this until I called sockpuppet on T(S)A and he stopped using that account, but the same articles that he edits are now being edited (again) by DJQ. Talk about handing it to me on a silver platter.
Yes (again), I planned on using the whole RfA‎/note on T(S)A thing. It is pretty choice. I just didn't include it yet, until I did a little finger work (aka leg work) and put out some feelers like I did with you. I wanted to beat the bushes first and get some feedback. You will notice that after I accused T(S)A of being an SP in the WE (second against T(S)A) case he never edited again. He mostly likely saw all those IPs I had and decided to retreat to DJQ. But, that flushed him out. Disco must not be a good detective or would have figured this out when it happened. If you compare Disco's WE case against mine, well, I blasted T(S)A with so much. If you compare DJQ contrib timestamps to that of those of T(S)A you see that same pattern that I mapped out with T(S)A versus BradlyRM. You can see the same pattern of overlap. Again, I just didn't show that yet in my case folder. If you do think of anything else, jump in. I wouldn't mind if you did the DJQ v. T(S)A (BradlyRM) compare so it is more than one person presenting. I am a big fan of multiple petitioners. Thanks for you input and help. ~ WikiDon (talk) 23:17, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • PS: I also think that DJQ (Wikiproject Texas; WikiProject Dallas-Fort Worth) and T(S)A (Interstate Highways WikiProject; WikiProject Colorado) joining groups to put on their user page is smokescreen to give the appearance of a better contributor. They don't work on the project just their own thing. And, I would personally be embarrassed at the images this person has added. I delete better images than they contribute. Have you looked at the recent ones that DJQ just added? Must just feel a since of importance by getting as many images as then can in articles? The team ones aren't bad, but the ones out the car window, crap. WikiDon (talk)
Oh, what about this: If you look at the image histories, you see: Martinez07 (talk · contribs) uploaded some of them, but then EVHS (NNYDL), BradlyRM, and Thomasalazar did the reverting of the copyright notices. So, they are either the same person too, or they know each other. WikiDon (talk)
I think that discospinster spotted it early on, personally, based on this, but was talked out of it by Bfigura (see his comment to discospinster). At this point, I think that's it's pretty much a done deal, so it's just a matter of filling out the paperwork. Dori (Talk • Contribs) 23:57, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Saw it, thanks! for catching it. I also rvt something you added in there by accident I think, one of those "I'm in a hurry clicked on the shortcut buttons above the edit window box" things. Double check. ~ WikiDon (talk) 23:15, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've done it and didn't even know it. Had to check the history-diffs of an article to find out. Usually happens when you start editing in the box before the window has completely loaded, while it is still churning. ~ WikiDon (talk) 23:22, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
See, I got in a hurry and only thought I copied that link, right click+copy is more reliable than CRTL+C. This guy is either a cull on a turnip or Jerry Seinfeld, can't figure out which? Some people's use of the English language, even when applying for adminship, makes a head shake. Maybe we could / should ask that some contributors move to es.wikipedia.org? ~ WikiDon (talk) 01:37, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Abuse of Your Trust

Dori, I just wanted to apologize to you personally for abusing your trust. Read my comments here. Please carry on with some of the good things I tried to do. Once again, I am sorry. 4.240.165.59 (talk) 01:18, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

....Mmmm

Excuse me i'm not a sock puppet editor. I make lots of useful daily adds to this wonderful site. So wherever you heard that from its not true.. i dont know a Diamond Quimby..?! Idk why they keep saying i'm a sockpuppet.. Martinez07 (talk) 00:44, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I say it looks pretty likely, you say no, I say let's see what a checkuser request shows. Dori (Talk • Contribs) 01:25, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello.

I was wanting to know why you marked me with a sock puppet banner? I'm not a sock puppet editior..or what ever. I have never made edits to this site before i created my account. ABQster (talk) 23:17, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I can just repeat myself from what I said the last time around:
Well, I say it looks pretty likely, you say no, I say let's see what a checkuser request shows. Dori (Talk • Contribs) 23:36, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Why would you wanna block me anyhow? i make lots of contibutions to this site, have some respect. Second i'm not a sock puppet and your the one who added me to that list. ABQster (talk) 03:10, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Let's take this piece by piece:
  • I have never made edits to this site before i created my account.
And 3.5 hours later, I tagged you as a sockpuppet.
  • i make lots of contibutions to this site
In your first 3.5 hours? That's not common--or at least not common for someone who isn't already very familiar with editing WP.
But to be more precise, in the 10.5 hours that you've been an editor, you have (outside of user, talk, and template space) created one page (Daniel R. Foley‎) and edited three pages (Albuquerque City Council‎; New Mexico House of Representatives‎; Española, New Mexico‎). Of those three existing pages, care to guess how many of them were extensively edited in the past by PoliticianTexas (and/or his sockpuppets)?
Answer: three out of three. At this point, I gotta point to WP:DUCK.
  • Why would you wanna block me anyhow?
I have no desire to block you, just PoliticianTexas--as he thinks he's above the rules. If you're not him, you should be happy that I'm taking it to checkuser.
  • your the one who added me to that list
That's right, I did, and I never said otherwise.
If you're not him, then a checkuser is the best possible thing for you. If they say you're not related, dandy--although I'd suggest that you consider editing some pages that haven't previously been touched by PoliticianTexas (and possibly learning how to use "show preview", although that's another issue entirely). Dori (Talk • Contribs) 04:30, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well

Sorry if this dosen't sound civil. Im trying to. Well, I don't if you know this, but in New Mexico, half of the population is Hispanic/Latino, and over half of the population is Roman Catholic--Dominic Edward Aragon (talk) 15:38, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Then find a verifiable and reliable source that says so. Unfortunately for you, the perfectly good source that's being used in the article clearly says otherwise. And until then, you shouldn't change it. Dori (Talk • Contribs) 20:27, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My Links are getting reverted

Hi Dori, I put some informational links on some city pages thinking that they might be helpful. But all of them got reverted twice. Any particular reason for that? --PhoneBookHistorianGeek (talk) 16:08, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I and others all left messages about this on your talk page—I think it's covered pretty well there, but in particular, you need to read Wikipedia's guidelines for external links. Dori (Talk • Contribs) 20:18, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, thanks for letting me know. I will keep it mind and will discuss before making any changes. But it was not only about Albuquerque, NM. All of my changes got reverted. Anywayz, I will respect the guidelines and take it from there.--PhoneBookHistorianGeek (talk) 15:52, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: All settlements notable?

Wikipedia:Notability (Places and transportation) is still a proposed guideline. The working consensus at AfD is still better described by WP:OUTCOMES. When an independent village comes to AfD, it is usually snowball keep as long as WP:V is satisfied. It is accepted that secondary source coverage will likely be found eventually. That is being actively debated in the guideline as well as a currently open AfD debate. As for San Mateo, it contains a historically important archaeological site. There is something to develop. • Gene93k (talk) 23:04, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adminship

Listen, I know I am no where near adminship, but it's my account! Why is it not appropiate? - Dominic Edward Aragon (talk) 15:26, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, let's walk this through: you're not an admin; you know you're not an admin, and yet you are claiming on your user page that you are an admin. Why do that except to mislead newbies into thinking you've got more rights than you actually do? End result: actual admins take it personally.
I'd change it, and asap, especially as now you can't claim that it's just an editing error. Dori (Talk • Contribs) 03:03, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Can I be blocked from editing? - Dominic Edward Aragon (talk) 18:56, 28 July 2008 (UTC) 18:55, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not an admin, so I can't venture a guess as to what one might do. However, given that you've been warned that it's a bad idea and have left it up , they no longer have to assume good faith. So yeah, it could happen. Dori (Talk • Contribs) 21:56, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image Deletion for Blue Espanola City Seal.jpg

Thank You for deleting it I stated I found it and I didn;t know it had a link this won't happen again. Colorado Lover (talk) 00:32, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, you stated that you created it, which made me curious enough to do a quick search to see if I could find it online—which didn't take me long. And to be clear: I just tagged it; I didn't delete it. Deletion takes an admin, which I'm not. Dori (Talk • Contribs) 01:28, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Neuvo Mexico

Hi, Do you know if there are any admins in NM? - Dominic Edward Aragon (talk) 02:46, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea whatsoever—sorry! Dori (Talk • Contribs) 02:16, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Dori! :)

I'm trying to start off fresh, I have learned from my mistakes.. So Just let me try, i make lots of great edits to wikipedia and i think its only right to let me stay! Well have a good day :) Brandynman (talk) 02:25, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've already posted it over to Requests for checkuser/Case/PoliticianTexas, so you'll have to convince them, not me. But personally, given that you were offered (and didn't accept) a {{second chance}}, I'm not feeling terribly indulgent. Dori (Talk • Contribs) 02:47, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New Account: Dowhatyoudo

How about doing a CU on Dowhatyoudo (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)? Thanks. 207.69.137.40 (talk) 22:12, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I don't have CU powers. But I do think that this is more than likely. Dori (Talk • Contribs) 22:31, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Checking PoliticianTexas images

Yes, I'll be happy to collaborate on this. I've been working on his recent incarnations namely Dowhatyoudo (talk · contribs) and Martinez07 (talk · contribs). He is a scatterbrain so I don't know if there's a logical way to split the work. Maybe the best would be to split by geographical areas, say Albuquerque vs. everything else. What's your preference? A lot of his images look like amateur work, with poor lighting and composition, and I've been concentrating on the professional-looking ones. BTW, at the moment Dowhatyoudo (talk · contribs) is blocked indefinitely for copyright violation. Let me know how you want to proceed. Thanks. --Uncia (talk) 04:07, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good to me. I've got a list (of sorts) over here of all not-yet-deleted images uploaded by PoliticianTexas and his socks (not yet including Dowhatyoudo's). We can split them up (in any fashion) if you'd like, although Athaenara suggested that we just list the entire batch at once at PUI. If that can actually succeed in a reasonable timeframe, I'd be happy to be done with it.
Also, in case you hadn't seen it, I listed Dowhatyoudo at Requests_for_checkuser/Case/PoliticianTexas yesterday. I haven't heard anything back on that as yet, though.
Dori (Talk • Contribs) 04:20, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
How about this? A lot of the amateurish images are not obvious copyright violations, so that may be hard to sell at PUI. Many of them, though, are orphaned, low quality, or unencyclopedic, which would qualify them for deletion at IFD. And in fact many of the non-orphan photos do not add much to the articles they are referenced in, so they could be deleted or replaced there to make them orphans. Then we would just have a few toughies left that would require a stronger case. Let me know if you like this idea and then I will mark as many as possible for IFD today. --Uncia (talk) 13:16, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good to me. I've updated the list of images so that you can tell which are/aren't orphaned. Feel free to update that page to show what you've done so we can keep this straight.
BTW, the RFCU for Dowhatyoudo came back as unrelated, which I am having a very hard time believing. OTOH, he's now blocked and all his images deleted, so the end result is what matters, I guess. Dori (Talk • Contribs) 20:28, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've marked all the existing orphans for IFD. I also found the source of the Antonito Downtown photo and marked it for speedy deletion. Next I'll look at creating new orphans by removing references to the remaining images. BTW, the non-free content items that the bot deleted were only deleted fom this page, not from the system, so you might want to undo deleting those items. The non-free items are basically OK (except for Taos High School), except that some have dodgy sources and some have no fair use rationale. --Uncia (talk) 04:04, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Great stuff! Yeah, I realized that I was jumping the gun on those non-free images (wishful thinking?) and put them back in as just text. It's looking good... Dori (Talk • Contribs) 04:22, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I started to work on orphaning images from Rio Rancho and was rummaging around for replacement images I could use, when I ran across the sources for the PoliticianTexas images! So I ended up marking a lot of stuff for speedy deletion instead of making orphans, but I suppose that's better. I still plan to work on orphaning next. --Uncia (talk) 17:12, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All images have been handled now (hooray!!). Athaenara went through and deleted all the images we asked for, even the ones we didn't ask to have speedied, so I think all all of PoliticianTexas's images are gone now except for a couple of logos that were OK and some logos that will be deleted in 7 days. Whew! I hope he doesn't come back for a while. --Uncia (talk) 23:16, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the WikiMedal! I enjoyed working with you on this project. You're very organized and methodical, and that's essential for dealing with such a long list of violations. And I get a real sense of accomplishment from looking at the resulting long list of redlink images! --Uncia (talk) 13:46, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DoriSmith/Archive_2&oldid=274014671"