User talk:Centaur

--Centaur (talk) 17:13, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Welcome

Hello, Centaur, and welcome to the Simple English Wikipedia! Thank you for your changes.

You may want to begin by reading these pages:

• Help
• Rules
• Links to useful pages
• How to write Simple English pages
• How to copy from another Wikipedia

For some ideas of pages to work on, read Wikipedia:Requested pages or the list of wanted pages.

You can change any pages you want! Any changes you make can be seen right away. You can ask questions at Wikipedia:Simple talk. At the end of your messages on talk pages, please sign your name by typing "~~~~" (four tildes).

If you need help just click here and type {{helpme}} and your question and someone will reply to you shortly.

Good luck and happy changing! Mr Wiki Pro (talk) 20:03, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank-you Mr Pro! Centaur (talk) 20:19, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Your welcome --Mr Wiki Pro (talk) 20:23, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

A (disambiguation)

Hello, Centaur. Just to let you know, I removed the category you put on this page. With one or two exceptions, we don't put categories on disambiguation pages, because the categories belong on the pages linked on the dab page. Feel free to let me know if you have any questions about this. --Auntof6 (talk) 04:18, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello Auntof6. Thanks for correcting my mistake. I was trying to get "A" into the category "SI unit symbols". Do you know how I could achieve that? Centaur (talk) 20:58, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

You would have to write an article about the symbol, but I don't think we'd support that. I see that you created that category recently. I just took a couple of letter pages out of it, because although they included the abbreviations, they weren't about them. The remaining entries in the category are redirects, and we don't put categories on most redirects, either. I'm afraid this category doesn't contain any valid articles, so it will be deleted. How about making a new list article instead, called something like "List of SI unit abbreviations"? Not everything makes a good category. --Auntof6 (talk) 21:58, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

AN notification

A courtesy note to let you know that I have made a complaint against you on WP:AN. Martinvl (talk) 22:17, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

The irony! Centaur (talk) 19:40, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Your note at Talk:System of measurement

Hi, Centaur. I saw your note on this talk page. You might want to post on Wikipedia:Simple talk to let people know you've started a discussion on the talk page. Otherwise, the only people who will see your note are people who watch the page, and there probably aren't many of those. Cheers! --Auntof6 (talk) 23:04, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Auntof6, thanks for the advice. I have added a note to Simple Talk as you suggested. Come along and join in too, if you have any interest in the subject! Centaur (talk) 23:19, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Edit warring on measurement articles

You and Martinvl have been edit warring in various articles in topics related to measurement. Because of that, I am imposing a topic ban on both of you: effective immediately, you are both forbidden to do any content editing related to those topics. If you violate this topic ban, you will be blocked from all editing here until the issues can be evaluated. I have seen the complaint at WP:AN#Disruption by User:Centaur (aka DeFacto), and I will look at the articles listed. If you wish to comment on this, please do so at WP:AN#Administrator response. --Auntof6 (talk) 02:03, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Please see my edit here, and act accordingly. --Auntof6 (talk) 07:29, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely per WP:ONESTRIKE for continuing the edits that had you blocked on en.wiki as DeFacto. -DJSasso (talk) 13:02, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

As I have never done any edits on en.wiki as DeFacto, there must have been an incorrect assumption made somewhere. Please explain the source of that allegation. --Centaur (talk) 13:18, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Checkuser evidence matches you as both as the same person editing from the same location. But not only does the technical evidence match, the behavioral evidence matches. The two combined are more than enough to link you as the same person. -DJSasso (talk) 13:24, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Then the incorrect assumption must have been made in the interpretation of the technical evidence. DeFacto doesn't seem to have edited for years, perhaps the evidence has got corrupted or spoiled in some way. Can someone else re-check the evidence please. Perhaps someone familiar with the isp situation in the country concerned. There has certainly been a mistake made somewhere. --Centaur (talk) 13:41, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Sockpuppets of DeFacto/you have edited as recently as 3 weeks ago on en.wiki, just the main account hasn't edited for awhile because it was banned. Either way behavioral evidence is more than enough in this situation I believe. The technical evidence just makes it concrete. -DJSasso (talk) 14:08, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Let's rule out the technical evidence then, as it is clearly unreliable in this case. Who is responsible for compiling the behavioal evidence, and what qualifications do they have? Or is it just a matter of saying: ah! he has edited one of the same articles, it must be him. I haven't even looked at DeFacto's entire record, but I have seen he's edited 100's of articles. --Centaur (talk) 14:24, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

It isn't remotely unreliable. As I said it is very clear you are the same. -DJSasso (talk) 14:44, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Well it clearly is unreliable from where I'm sitting. I can see though, that you've made your minds up. Better that ten innocent persons be convicted than that one guilty person go free I suppose. Although I'm disappointed not to be able to edit, at least I have the satisfaction of sitting on the moral high ground.

Not having been bocked before, from here or en.wiki, does "indefinite" mean forever, or is there an expiry date, or other means to get the block lifted? Centaur (talk) 18:51, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

It doesn't always mean for ever it just means there is no expiry set (yet) --Mr Wiki Pro (talk) 21:39, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Who will decide whether to set an expiry, and how will I know when/if one is set? Is there anything, other than protest my innocence to deaf ears, that I can do to get unblocked? Or am I banished forever now, having been allegedly shown by some dodgy technical evidence (or by a dodgy interpretation of some very sound technical evidence) to be someone who I had never come across before and who hasn't edited for years. Centaur (talk) 23:01, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Well any admin can decide if and when your block will expire. --Mr Wiki Pro (talk) 22:08, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Unblock request

This blocked user asked to be unblocked, but one or more administrators said no to this unblock request. Other administrators can also review this block, but should not unblock the user without a good reason. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Centaur (contribs · deleted contribs · block log · filter log · global contribs)

---

Request reason:

I hope to show that this block is in fact not needed to stop damage or disruption to Simple Wikipedia.

• I came to Simple in good faith, to help improve some of the articles related to units of measurement.
• I only ever made positive contributions, and I gave each of my edits a clear edit summary to explain my changes.
• Check these article histories to see my contributions: Mile, Kilometre, Kilometres per hour, Yard, Thou (unit), Inch, Foot (unit), Furlong, Chain (unit), Metre
• My changes to Litre (history) did encounter some opposition from User:Martinvl. This resulted in a bit of an edit war. But I felt that the reliably sourced content was a valuable addition to that article. With hindsight, and knowing what I now know about Martinvl's history of disrupting measurement articles on English Wikipedia by attempting to suppress what might be seen as negativity towards the metric system, and aggressively pushing his own personal POV - at all costs, I would certainly stand back from such situations if they ever arose again.
• I encountered a similar problem with Martinvl in Metric System. The problem there was, again, that he only wanted the metric system presented in a good light, and would not accept content which documented the resistance that it was met with when first introduced into France. I did, however, attempt to civilly discuss this issue with him, but was stonewalled. These appear to be the very reason why he has been banished from English Wikipedia.
• If allowed back, I plan to increase coverage of the chequered history of the metric system, warts and all, as documented in the many reliable references I have read. I also plan to expand the Decimal Day article that I created, and add other measurement and currency related, reliably sourced, articles.

Finally, I must just reiterate that my sole purpose here is to help improve the content of Simple Wikipedia, and I will not damage or disrupt that process. Please reconsider whether my block is necessary in this light. Thank you.

Decline reason:

<see below> --Chenzw  Talk  10:58, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Centaur (talk) 16:33, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Discussion

Please be aware that removing the block would not remove your topic ban. That is a separate issue thst would need to be addressed separately, and only if the block is lifted. --Auntof6 (talk) 17:07, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Fair enough. One step at a time. Auntof6 or Mr Wiki Pro (or anyone else) do you know how long it will be before my unblock request is likely to be answered? I'm impatient to get editing again, but getting frustrated by the delay. And the articles are begging to be worked on! Centaur (talk) 21:32, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

There is no specific time frame, and your impatience and frustration won't affect that. An admin would need to look at it. Mr Wiki Pro is not an admin. I am one, but since I was previously involved in dealing with your edit war, I'm not sure I should do the review. You could post at WP:AN to bring this to the attention of the other admins.

I will ask you this: if you and Martinvl were both unblocked, how would you handle things differently if you disagreed again about article content? --Auntof6 (talk) 22:29, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Auntof6, but I can't post at WP:AN to get attention because of my block. I'll just have to be patient and wait for another administrator to pass by will I?

You asked how I would "handle things differently if you [I] disagreed [with Martinvl] again about article content". I would try even harder to engage him in logical, and meaningful, discussion. If that continued to fail to be productive as before, I'd attempt to get help and opinions from other editors. I certainly wouldn't engage in futile edit wars again - that was my big mistake last time. Centaur (talk) 18:51, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Oh, right, sorry, I wasn't thinking. I'll post there for you. --Auntof6 (talk) 19:40, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

I see you've started a conversation there for me now, thanks for that Auntof6. I do see a lack of enthusiasm to answer my request though.

Can you also relay for me please, that all I am asking, after an unfortunate encounter and after my inexcusable reaction, is for a second chance to show that my contribution to Simple Wikipedia will bring more benefit than liability. I see room for expansion and improvement in Simple, and have the experience and enthusiasm to do that in many subject areas. I have learnt the lesson that Simple won't tolerate edit warring. What is there to lose? At worst, I will let myself down again - and can then be banished forever! Please give me a second chance to contribute to this excellent project. :-) Centaur (talk) 06:33, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
No, I'm not going to keep posting there every time you have something to add. I posted once, but mostly just because I'd done so for Martinvl and I want to treat you equally. You've used the unblock request template that puts you in the umblock request category, and that is enough. --Auntof6 (talk) 07:42, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

I do not think that the edit war here is your first edit war which you have experienced. Continued edit warring contributes nothing and further disrupts the editing process, and is frowned upon. The fact that you have continued to edit war over here suggests that you have no strong intention to contribute positively to this wiki. -- Chenzw  Talk  01:32, 19 April 2014 (UTC)}}

User:Chenzw, blocks are not supposed to be punitive, and certainly not for punishing mistakenly alleged events from elsewhere.

I know we are all entitled to opinions, but you are wrong to "think" I've been involved in edit wars before. I have, naturally in a project such as Wikipedia, been involved in content disputes, but I have done nothing that comes near to an "edit war". I've already admitted my fault that led to my block here, and pledged not to get involved in warring again. So, in a nutshell, I have not "continued" to edit war here. I made a mistake here, apologised, and promised not to do it again. I have also stated my intention here (supported by the evidence you removed above) and commitment to continue making positive contributions here. Centaur (talk) 09:17, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

I apologise for the accidental removal which occurred while I was copying the unblock request reason. With regards to the above, checkuser evidence shows that this is not your first edit war. Since Bsadowski1 and Djsasso have not commented to suggest otherwise, this unblock request shall remain declined. Chenzw  Talk  10:08, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

User:Chenzw, sorry to be persistent, but this is important to me, if not to you. You mentioned "checkuser evidence"; well as soon as I saw that "evidence" I emailed Bsadowski1 (14 March to be precise) asking for clarification and explanation. To date I have had no reply from Bsadowski1, so assume he cannot support that claim. I can't copy that email here because it contained details I'd rather not be in the public domain, but I can forward you a copy of it if you need proof. Please reconsider your interpretation of my actions. Centaur (talk) 11:08, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

User:Chenzw, despite the lack of substantiated allegations (and Bsadowski1 has ignored my request for more than 6 weeks now) and despite my assurances, you would rather punish me further by leaving me blocked, than allow me to edit. Can you give a reasoned explanation of that apparently irrational decision please. What irreversible damage do you think I am likely to do? How long do you think I need to remain blocked before you think I will have learned my lesson? Centaur (talk) 12:13, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

I think you miss the point. This isn't punishment, it is prevention. You have shown to be continuing your behavior from en.wiki here. As such you are blocked to prevent that from reoccurring here. Being that you are blocked per onestrike, usually the amount of time you remain blocked here is the time until you are unblocked on the wiki you were originally blocked on. -DJSasso (talk) 12:33, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

With all due respect, User:Djsasso, it is you who has clearly missed the point. I haven't been "shown to be continuing" anything. I have had a wild allegation made about me. I have never been blocked on any other wiki, I only have this block here. Which is why I requested an unblock, and gave good reasons. So, you see, this can only be considered as a punishment block, and there is no plausible evidence to suggest the contrary. Centaur (talk) 12:44, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Well just because you deny it, doesn't mean you haven't. You continued the same behavior here that your exhibited on en.wiki. And yes there is plausible evidence. A couple of checkusers matched you to your DeFacto account on on en.wiki. That you reject the fact that they matched you isn't really all that unusual, most guilty deny they have done anything. Being that your unblock request has been denied, your talk page is now blocked. -DJSasso (talk) 13:06, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

And in response to your email, its really very simple. Even if the original DeFacto account hasn't edited in awhile, the socks of DeFacto have continued to edit with the most recent occasion being very recently. Its very simple to link your account to DeFacto through the many socks that have continued to be used. -DJSasso (talk) 15:09, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Question

What's the point of making an unblock request if nobody is going to respond to it? It seems the decision to block can be made on the whim of just one person, and without proof, or even reasonable grounds for suspicion of wrongdoing and without discussion and without consultation with the accused. Then there is nothing that can be done by the blocked user to clear their name. And it's not as if there isn't enough room here for a few more conscientious editors is it! Please unblock me someone, anyone, so that I can get on with adding some more accurate, fully reliably sourced, and good quality content. Centaur (talk) 21:35, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

It does no good to post this here -- it's like talking to yourself. The only people who will see it are those who watch your talk page. If you want to get the admins' attention, post at WP:AN. --Auntof6 (talk) 22:54, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

NM, I forgot you can't post there. I don't think you're blocked from email -- try emailing an admin. --Auntof6 (talk) 22:56, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

YGM!

Hello, Centaur. You have a new email! Please check it at your convenience.
You can take off this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{YGM}} template.