Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 11:57, 9 September 2008

Discussion of your contributions

Hi Saxophonemn. There is currently a discussion about your edits being made here. If you decide to participate in it, please be mindful of WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA. I can elaborate further if you need more information. IronDuke 00:26, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to say, but edits like this one are utterly inappropriate. Please don't do that sort of thing. – Luna Santin (talk) 11:28, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

I needed better references, sorry. Saxophonemn (talk) 15:08, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

That's not really the point I was getting at, actually. While a user doesn't exactly "own" the userpage associated with their name, they are generally assumed to have quite a lot of control over it; specifically, with a few noteworthy exceptions, it's best to assume that most or all content on it was compiled by the user or with their approval. Making an accusation like that is confrontational enough, but adding it to a userpage like so could be characterized in Misplaced Pages's culture as being downright hostile. Would you appreciate it if someone added a similar line to your profile page? – Luna Santin (talk) 19:56, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Agree with Luna. There's no need to criticize CJ as a person, just focus on edits you think are bad. And do take some to understand the culture here, please. There's a lot of flaming on the internet, but it's frowned on here. IronDuke 01:11, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

I was merely bringing to attention what he does besides Canadian politics. Again my apologies for not making proper citations. But I don't claim to be someone I'm not.--Saxophonemn (talk) 04:17, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Sax, it doesn't matter if CJ claims to be someone he's not. This may sound weird, but credentials/background mean nothing here when it comes to editors, they only matter when it comes to citations. The message you're leaving on CJ's user page is inflammatory. The point is, we are all trying to edit in a collegial atmosphere. Sometimes that means we have to edit alongside people whose opinions we find hateful (and who find our own opinions hateful). What to do? 1) Try to keep emotions/opinions away from editing an posts on talk pages. Maintain calm. 2) Focus on making articles better, not trashing other editors. And again, with very few exceptions, you should leave other people's user pages alone, unless you are nearly 100% sure your additions will be welcome. "Proper citations" has nothing to do with it. Userspace =/= Article space. I'm not telling you this to scold, BTW, I'm telling you useful information that will help you continue to be allowed to edit here. And I'm happy to clarify anything if you have further questions. IronDuke 14:02, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Then how would someone challenge another editor's mischief? My concern was the particular user had a hidden agenda that needed to be exposed so their edits can be understood in a greater context. Those were my chief concerns, because it felt like he was working where he had no business. I will never edit a user's page like that again as there appears to be more exciting ways to report/complain about a users deficiencies.--Saxophonemn (talk) 15:55, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

You challenge another editor by challenging their edits. An edit is either good, or it is bad. Why the edit was made is not particularly relevant; just explain why the edit does or does not work. It doesn't matter if CJ has a hidden agenda, or even an open agenda (in my view -- not universally shared), he's allowed to edit wherever he wants, unless under specific sanction from an administrator or the abritation committee not to do so. And again, don't think about it in terms of complaining about another user's "deficiencies" (or don't do so out loud, anyway). Think about it in terms of improving articles. IronDuke 16:52, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

JIDF

Hi Saxophonemn Please share your point of view, Please don’t use loaded words, Please--Puttyschool (talk) 18:05, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Blocked by a stranger?

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

Request reason:

I am accused of being a sock puppet, the accusation is baseless

Decline reason:

The accusation appears to be confirmed by a checkuser, who performed the block. Additionally, you are accused of being a sockpuppet of User:Einsteindonut, who requested unblocking here using the exact same request as you, word for word. Unfortunately, the case seems fairly clear. UltraExactZZ ~ Evidence 17:13, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

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.

--Saxophonemn (talk) 15:18, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

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

Request reason:

I hope this is the correct process for 2nd appeal: Sorry for not clarifying completely as noted I am not Eisteinsdonut, the only circumstantial evidence is a copied tag, which can easily be copied. If you notice my user page is full of boxes etc. I have user activity starting from May when I registered. Reading the histories of the users should show that I am not Einsteinsdonut. If you notice my contributions you would find that I'm a grad student at University_of_South_Florida and an alumnus of UConn I play the saxophone and I'm Jewish. I'm also from Boston (not on my page) so I hate New York, a Red Sox fan, why would I put a New York skyline on my user page? The only reason why I seem to be implicated is that on the JIDF page I make many posts in agreement with Einsteinsdonut, I wasn't aware that agreeing with someone was tantamount to being their sockpuppet, especially since I have been here longer and know how to code here much better. Additionally google saxophonemn I have a real trail, and google user pages, etc.

Decline reason:

Per deja vu — slakr 22:41, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

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.

Fayssal said this accont was a sockpuppet "by proxy" of Einsteindonut. I'm asking him to clarify what that means. Mangojuice 20:08, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

This is ridiculous, I feel like I'm in the dark, I'm accused with no proof nor crime. I've been on Misplaced Pages since May and only became active last July. Everyone citing Einsteinsdonut as proof because he copied my tag seems strange. I figured out first how to file an appeal, he just copied my page. --Saxophonemn (talk) 23:45, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

You edit in the same areas with the same computer profile. Furthermore, you edit via open proxies, which is not allowed in general. The tag is not really relevant, it's your contribution history and technical evidence from the logs that make it clear you and Einsteinsdonut are not acting independently. As for your pleas of innocence, please read User:Mangojuice/A letter to sockpuppets. Mangojuice 03:27, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I read your nice letter essentially it states that all those charged are guilty. You didn't need more than one line. The facts are quite simple I'm SaxophoneMn a person who really exists I have that as my digg, Yahoo, AIM, and Google for example. If you read those pages you will see pictures of me, the real me! The name origin dates back to AIM when there was a character limit so I couldn't get SaxophoneMan.

The open proxy thing? I have my MacBookPro at two locations, school (USF network) and my condo (Brighthouse), I have a registered name, so it's no big surprise who I am.

My editing history when compared to Einstein's is that there are agreements in the JIDF, as noted by both logs that is the only area of confluence. The grand scheme of my edits barely touch upon the JIDF. Why can't anyone see this for what it is. It seems like there is no good faith here, which I thought Misplaced Pages is suppose to have. --Saxophonemn (talk) 11:41, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Help Me - J'accuse

I need help to get out of this ban, I profess my innocence and request help in clearing my username! --Saxophonemn (talk) 11:57, 9 September 2008 (UTC)