User talk:Harvardy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Thank you Lucky 6.9 for unblocking me. Harvardy 02:19, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
- You bet. Glad to help. - Lucky 6.9 03:54, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
Longterm vandalism of Empire of Atlantium
Please stop. If you continue to remove content from pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Gene_poole 04:33, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
- My bad, put back the other two categories, but don't you now remove the two that I added that belong there. If you don't agree, please discuss. Harvardy 04:42, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
Vandalism of your user page
Please note that 2 of your sock accounts have already been identified and blocked as sockpuppets of Wik. This sock account will eventually be blocked too, but removing valid warnings will result in the block being applied sooner rather than later. --Gene_poole 05:03, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
- So does your wicked imagination give me the right to put the same type of warning on your user page for my suspicions or for your known sock? BTW IMHO you are the one vandalizing my user page, not myself. Harvardy 05:06, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
I have once again restored the sockpuppet warnings on your user page. If you continue to remove them, I will contact an administrator and have the page protected. Davidpdx 06:06, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
- Johnski, you have been reported for flouting your Arbcom ban, and are about to have this sockpuppet account blocked too. You can try to keep removing the sockpuppet warning until then, but I'd advise you to stop wasting your time. --Gene_poole 05:13, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Hello
Hey, why you are not suspected to be one of the soldiers of my "socketpuppets army"? eheheh.--Doktor Who 01:33, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
- Because you have a cooler user name. Harvardy 01:53, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, thank you for liking my username. :) I'm not an expert in Gene-related adventures in the geography domain (tho I know him for his "opinions" in music), I'd like that someone could explain me why Wik and Jonski deserved to be banned or indefinitely blocked.--Doktor Who 12:09, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
- You'd have to read their arbitration cases, but if I remember correctly Gene Pooley used at least one sock puppet to get support to defeat Johnski. It was only later discovered that he was using at least one puppet, user:Centauri. Good luck with emperor George, he is very mean and has lots of time on his hands to get his way. I'm really surprised he hasn't been indefinately blocked, or "hard banned" as he calls it and deserves it. Harvardy 16:04, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
- Just in case you don't understand the difference Harvardy, Wik was hard-banned (ie permanently blocked) by Jimbo Wales himself. Heard of him? You should have. He's the guy who founded and runs Wikipedia. That was after Wik had previously been indefinitely blocked on 3 different occasions by the Arbcom. Hard-banning is slightly different from the indefinite block that the Arbcom applied to Johnski and any of his sock or meatpuppet accounts(like you, for example). I hope this spells it out a little more clearly for you. --Gene_poole 00:20, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the education. I hope you get what you have coming, i.e. the same as Wiki. Harvardy 02:17, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
- As you've possibly already noticed, problem editors who lack respect for others and any form of credibility tend to get indefinitely blocked or hard-banned by the Arbitration Committee when their chronic abuse of Wikipedia policies and conventions becomes too much for the WP community to tolerate. On the other hand, respected, credible editors, who contribute in a knowledgeable manner to dozens of articles on dozens of topics, in co-operation with dozens of other editors over many years tend not to get blocked or banned whenever they spoil the party of whichever troll and/or sockpuppet happens to be hysterically ejaculating their rancid venom into Wikipedia this week. This neatly summarises the reason that you have been banned and I have not. Best you learn to live with it, because your present trajectory shows that you have learned nothing from your past errors. --Gene_poole 03:12, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
- I certainly don't have the time to devote as you have but I have only been temporarily blocked based on your accusations which turned out to be untrue. On the other hand your sock Centauri has been permantenly blocked. I win, you lose. How are you coming with your imaginary empire, little boy George? Harvardy 03:46, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
- Still playing fast and loose with the truth, I see, eh Johnski. You and all your many sockpuppets and meatpuppets have been indefinitely blocked by the Arbitration Committee. You, Harvardy are a known sockpuppet of Johnski, and hence are likewise indefinitely blocked. Lying about it changes nothing. Any issues you have with anyone/anything else - imaginary or otherwise - are of precisely zero interest to me, and have precisely zero bearing on your behavioural issues, for which you have been appropriately disciplined. You are the problem here, not me. That is why you are indefinitely blocked. If and when you rectify your attitiude, express regret for your past behaviour and demonstrate a willingness to comply with WP policies that decision may possibly be subject to review. Until then your presence here serves no useful purpose. --Gene_poole 04:20, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
- I certainly don't have the time to devote as you have but I have only been temporarily blocked based on your accusations which turned out to be untrue. On the other hand your sock Centauri has been permantenly blocked. I win, you lose. How are you coming with your imaginary empire, little boy George? Harvardy 03:46, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
- As you've possibly already noticed, problem editors who lack respect for others and any form of credibility tend to get indefinitely blocked or hard-banned by the Arbitration Committee when their chronic abuse of Wikipedia policies and conventions becomes too much for the WP community to tolerate. On the other hand, respected, credible editors, who contribute in a knowledgeable manner to dozens of articles on dozens of topics, in co-operation with dozens of other editors over many years tend not to get blocked or banned whenever they spoil the party of whichever troll and/or sockpuppet happens to be hysterically ejaculating their rancid venom into Wikipedia this week. This neatly summarises the reason that you have been banned and I have not. Best you learn to live with it, because your present trajectory shows that you have learned nothing from your past errors. --Gene_poole 03:12, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the education. I hope you get what you have coming, i.e. the same as Wiki. Harvardy 02:17, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
- Just in case you don't understand the difference Harvardy, Wik was hard-banned (ie permanently blocked) by Jimbo Wales himself. Heard of him? You should have. He's the guy who founded and runs Wikipedia. That was after Wik had previously been indefinitely blocked on 3 different occasions by the Arbcom. Hard-banning is slightly different from the indefinite block that the Arbcom applied to Johnski and any of his sock or meatpuppet accounts(like you, for example). I hope this spells it out a little more clearly for you. --Gene_poole 00:20, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Let me know when you have confessed to what Wikipedia has found you to be, e.g. Centauri. Still denying that? Your opinions mean nothing to me as you are one of the biggest hypocrites I've ever encountered in my entire life. I've tried to help you in the past, but you are so vain, I give up for now. You want to work with me, or me to work with you? Then show some good faith, if you are capable. Try some random acts of kindness instead of random acts of malice. Harvardy 05:46, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
- Oh cut the crap. You are strongly suspected of being a member of, and possibly even heading, a global criminal organisation that has defrauded multi-millions of dollars from thousands of innocent victims over more than a decade. Your only purpose in editing WP has been the attempted whitewash of that organisation's article (and related articles), by selectively mis-quoting dozens of reputable sources, in an attempt to make them say something directly opposite what they do say. In doing so you have created and used a veritable army of sockpuppets and meatpuppets and wasted hundreds of hours in time of editors who, frankly, have much better things to do than battle vandals and POV-pushers. Unfortunately for you, there are those of us here who are not idiots, and who refuse to be cowed by your psychobabble, hectoring, harrassing and generally abominable abuse of WP - and as a result you have been found out, disciplined and indefinitely blocked. I did not do that to you. You did it to yourself. When it comes to hypocrisy and bare-faced cheek I could not, ever, in a million years, hope to hold a candle to you. --Gene_poole 06:03, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
- Wow, what did I do to deserve so much attention from you? Did I strike a cord with something I said? You are the only one that has been indefinitely blocked, not me. You have no authority at Wikipedia and therefore have no ability to put me in any category. Instead of facing the fact that your sock has been indefinitely blocked you try to push the attention from yourself to me. Just confess your folly and let's move on. Harvardy 06:50, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
- See comments above. Repeat indefinitely as necessary. --Gene_poole 07:23, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
- Wow, what did I do to deserve so much attention from you? Did I strike a cord with something I said? You are the only one that has been indefinitely blocked, not me. You have no authority at Wikipedia and therefore have no ability to put me in any category. Instead of facing the fact that your sock has been indefinitely blocked you try to push the attention from yourself to me. Just confess your folly and let's move on. Harvardy 06:50, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
- So GP has a "protector", Jimbo Wales himself, hahaha. It explains everything. Doktor Who 21:42, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- I removed the childish message just left here from GP. After finding out that GP dirtied himself with Centauri his protector vanished. He now has a meatpuppet enforcer User:Davidpdx that follows his lead and reverts stuff he doesn't like. Take a look at the time they have dedicated to not allowing me to put four words on my user page, "Believe it or not". Harvardy 23:26, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- I think "he" is very funny, no longer a mastodont, now he calls me "signore", an italian word, funny, I think he/she knows me very well in the real world, otherwise i couldn't explain such obsessive behaviour. I'm becoming interested in micronations, yes...Doktor Who 23:42, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
And yes, I've likely found another sock of GP, one that was destroying some music articles.Doktor Who 23:42, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
- As you well know, Johnski, editors like you, who are indefinitely blocked by the Arbitration Committee, are not permitted to edit WP, or to create sockpuppets or meatpuppets to circumvent the block. Edits made by such accounts may be reverted indefinitely. Hence, all edits by your sockpuppet account Harvardy outside this page will continue to be reverted. If you have a problem with Centauri you should take it up with him. If you believe Davidpdx is my meatpuppet, then open an RFC on him, or me, or both of us. Otherwise it would be best for all concerned if you stopped your childish antics. They simply confirm the wisdom of the Arbcom's decision to place an indefinite block on your account. --Gene_poole 23:38, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
- Here is the problem with your argument. You are not in a position to find me to be anything. You are the one that needs to take it up with Wikipedia if you believe I am someone other than myself, Harvardy. Who made you judge, jury and executioner? You don't think it is childish to constantly revert my page so that I can't have four words on it, "Believe it or not"? Harvardy 23:47, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
- As you well know, Johnski, editors like you, who are indefinitely blocked by the Arbitration Committee, are not permitted to edit WP, or to create sockpuppets or meatpuppets to circumvent the block. Edits made by such accounts may be reverted indefinitely. Hence, all edits by your sockpuppet account Harvardy outside this page will continue to be reverted. If you have a problem with Centauri you should take it up with him. If you believe Davidpdx is my meatpuppet, then open an RFC on him, or me, or both of us. Otherwise it would be best for all concerned if you stopped your childish antics. They simply confirm the wisdom of the Arbcom's decision to place an indefinite block on your account. --Gene_poole 23:38, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
Harvardy, it seems that he doesn't want to realize that he's just a user, and not an administrator. His abusive and pretentious tone is just a trick to intimidate newcomers; he's used to abuse, almost insult and he hopes that after an emotional over-reaction, his "victim" gets blocked or banned. He's trying such strategy on me and on you; he has no right to put any tag on your userpage, regardless your opinions on that DoM (or DOM, whatver) article. He's not been blocked yet because he seems a good editor sometimes, and becouse blocking a guy from Australia would not seem "politically correct".Doktor Who 00:03, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
- He requested admin status but wasn't found suitable. Harvardy 01:10, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
- Eheh, I know, I read that page.Doktor Who 01:35, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
- You two make a fine pair - although the irony of a pair of known sockpuppets accusing another editor of abuses for which there is no evidence seems to have escaped you. If you simply complied with WP policies there would be no problem, but you haven't, so I'll deal with you accordingly. Or, as the High Priest Melchizedek would put it "you will reap as you have sown". --Gene_poole 01:44, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
- Let's see, you think that because you "know" that we are violating WP policies that gives you the right to violate. Great logic. Harvardy 01:51, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
- That's certainly a good example of specious reasoning. I know you were violating WP policies because the Arbcom blocked you for it. Creating a sock account to evade the block is itself a violation. Your recent violation of WP:CIVIL is in plain view on this page, directly below this section. On the other hand, there is no evidence whatsoever that I have violated any WP policy, despite your attempts to use claims to that effect as a red-herring. --Gene_poole 02:27, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
- You know that you have violated the 3RR and your vandalism of my user page is plain and clear. Would it be uncivilized to call you a dickhead too? Besides you have been slapped down by an admin so why don't you give it a rest. Harvardy 02:36, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
- You should be so lucky. I'll give it a rest when you've been blocked, like you should have been months ago when you first created this sock account. If you think I'm going to let up just because one admin was fooled into making a knee-jerk wrong call thanks to a bit of sophistry from your new friend, you need to think again. --Gene_poole 02:50, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
- You know that you have violated the 3RR and your vandalism of my user page is plain and clear. Would it be uncivilized to call you a dickhead too? Besides you have been slapped down by an admin so why don't you give it a rest. Harvardy 02:36, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
- That's certainly a good example of specious reasoning. I know you were violating WP policies because the Arbcom blocked you for it. Creating a sock account to evade the block is itself a violation. Your recent violation of WP:CIVIL is in plain view on this page, directly below this section. On the other hand, there is no evidence whatsoever that I have violated any WP policy, despite your attempts to use claims to that effect as a red-herring. --Gene_poole 02:27, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
- Let's see, you think that because you "know" that we are violating WP policies that gives you the right to violate. Great logic. Harvardy 01:51, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
- You two make a fine pair - although the irony of a pair of known sockpuppets accusing another editor of abuses for which there is no evidence seems to have escaped you. If you simply complied with WP policies there would be no problem, but you haven't, so I'll deal with you accordingly. Or, as the High Priest Melchizedek would put it "you will reap as you have sown". --Gene_poole 01:44, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
- Eheh, I know, I read that page.Doktor Who 01:35, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Cease Leaving Messages on my Talk Page
I am warning you, do not leave messages on my talk page. Davidpdx 06:12, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, dickhead. Did I say something offensive to you? No, you just want to be a prick. Harvardy 06:18, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
- Dickhead, if you really want me to stop leaving messages on your talk page, then stop vandalizing my user page. Thank you. Harvardy 04:42, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Anonymous page reversions
Please note that the IP address 211.114.49.42 resolves to Creighton, New Zealand. --Gene_poole 01:01, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
- It says North Korea here, using dnsstuff, anyway I am aware that some ppl can trick their ip address.--Doktor Who 01:05, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
- What a coincidence as Davidpdx claims to live in Korea. Harvardy 02:01, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Page Vandalism
Do not revert [1] again. An IP check has confirmed that your accusation is entirely without foundation, in addition to which the comment that you are attempting to restore constitutes a blatant violation of WP:CIVIL, WP:ABUSE and WP:NPA. --Gene_poole 00:58, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
- I rewrote it, but you probably didn't notice. Are you willing to take off the one that says I'm suspected? I'm not in the Philippines and don't know anyone there. Is that where Centauri lives, because I noticed that all of his IP anons start with 125. Harvardy 01:01, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Personal attack, rudeness, incivility at User talk:Doktor Who
Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. However, we remind you not to attack other editors. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.(Unsigned by Gene Poole)
- What, you can not stand the truth? Are you ready to stop your rudeness, incivility and personal attacks? Are you ready to turn a new leaf? If so, we can work together and improve articles as a team. I rather doubt that a tiger can remove his stripes, but "hope springs eternal in the human breast." Harvardy 05:44, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Blocked
I have indefinitely blocked this account as a sockpuppet or meatpuppet of Johnski under the remedy at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Johnski. Tom Harrison Talk 13:02, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
