Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Ericsaindon2/Workshop

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ericsaindon2's anon IP edits[edit]

2) 10:28, 19 July 2006 Fred Bauder (Talk | contribs) blocked "Ericsaindon2 (talk · contribs)" with an expiry time of 1 month.

It is clear, by the edits of 69.227.173.154 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), that Ericsaindon2 is circumventing this block. As I stated on the main page, I think that he should be allowed to edit his RFAr pages, but he has also added comments to the Coolceasar RFAr, and editing Template:Orange County, California and Anaheim Hills, Anaheim, California against talk page consensus. Eric's anon IP edits seem to all be from Verizon in Orange County, California (an rDNS always shows a subdomain of dsl.irvnca.pacbell.net [e.g. adsl-69-232-62-33.dsl.irvnca.pacbell.net]). I'm not sure what should/can be done other than temp blocking anything from that subdomain when it's obvious that ES is editing from there. My personal opinion is that if he continues his unrepentant recalcitrance, he should just be banned by the community and avoid the whole hassle of this RFAr. BlankVerse 11:44, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, ES's behavior is on the verge of making this RfAr unnecessary. -Will Beback 19:32, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
ES keeps editing. Here are some accounts.
I've been mostly reverting the material (though not all) and giving 48 hour blocks to the IPs. I suppose shorter blocks wouldn't be any less effective. -Will Beback 06:08, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Of course all of these IP's are coming from Orange County, the article that every one edits and is involved in regarding this debate lives in Orange County, or they would not give a crap! I am sure yours would show up in Orange County as well, but that does not mean I am your sockpuppet. Just like, I am sure none of you have edited a page in a non-Californian related place article, so you cannot say that the edits were coming from Orange County as legitamate arguements, because the only people that edit Orange County pages are from Southern California. And, Ok, so you managed to pinpoint EVERYBODY that edits from Verizon in Orange County. It is not like Verizon is not known, and that it just might be that others on Wikipedia use Verizon in Orange County (wow what a coincedence, Verizon has more than one customer in Orange County). You must remember that there are 3 million Orange County residents. Your useless garbage you call evidence is nothing more that paranoia and speculation. -Ericsaindon2 08:53, 04 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
And another note. Your reference to all the IP numbers are from Irvine, California. I do not live anywhere near Irvine, California. I am sure either Corona or Yorba Linda has a closer substation for Verizon than Irvine, which is 25 miles away, it is a large county. -Ericsaindon2 08:56, 04 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above edits, although signed as the supposedly banned user Ericsaindon2, were from 69.227.169.76 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). An rDNS shows the IP is adsl-69-227-169-76.dsl.irvnca.pacbell.net. From what I can tell, ALL Verizon Orange County DSL accounts go though Irvine, CA (except possible the few areas that were originally GTE, such as Seal Beach, California). Through this IP, Eric also edited Tustin Foothills, California, so it is obvious that he continues to evade and ignore Fred Bauder's editing ban.
Eric: It is not so much the fact that all the IPs are all from Verizon, since the IPs listed are only a small number of the anon Verizon IPs from Orange County that have been editing the Wikipedia. Instead, it is the subject matter, the editing style, the choice of material that is edited, the spelling errors, and even the arguing in the edit summaries rather than on an article's talk pages that make it easy to identify which edits are yours and which are from other Verizon users in Orange County.
Another example of Eric's evasion of the ban: On 2 Aug 2006 69.227.160.24 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) edited Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ericsaindon2/Workshop, essentially admitting that he was Eric with this comment "I have served a month block as punishment,..." (but note that he said that he'd served a month's ban after exactly two weeks). He also edited Orange Hills, Orange, California, Tustin Foothills, California, and Southern California ZIP Codes. The last article is interesting because it looks like it was created by yet another one of Eric's sock puppets, 10171990snow (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). This edit [1] to Template:ArbComOpenTasks should confirm that it is Ericsaindon2's sockpuppet.
I could list more of the IPs that Eric has obviously been editing from, as well as much longer list of those IPs that are highly probable that Eric has edited from during the last three weeks he has ignored the ban, but what's the use. User:Will Beback and the other admins that have temp blocked Eric's IPs should be commended for their tireless efforts as playing Whack-a-Mole with each new IP that Eric edits from.
My personal opinion is that Eric should serve a ban that adds at least two days to the ban for each day he does an IP edit to evade the ban. BlankVerse 08:41, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Falsehoods on Ericsaindon2's user page[edit]

I'm not sure whether this is worth considering, or is even within the range of matters that the ArbComm can consider, but there are a number of falsehoods on his user page. He has eliminated some of them (such as saying he was an administrator), but there are still some left on that page. In particular are the following user boxes:

This user has over 9000 edits on the English Wikipedia.
This user has significantly contributed to 410 Good Articles on Wikipedia.

The truth is that ES has done less than 1,000 edits, and I didn't recognize any Good Articles in his edits.

I think as a good faith gesture to the Wikipedia community, I think that Ericsaindon2 should remove any falsehood on his talk page. I would also suggest that he should temper some of the exaggerations on his user page as well. BlankVerse 11:44, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another proposed findings of fact[edit]

The term "Anaheim Hills", although commonly used by residents of the area and by real estate businesses, has no official recognization by the city of Anaheim, California or any other government agency. BlankVerse 22:11, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You may propose this yourself. Fred Bauder 23:13, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One more proposals - on Administrators[edit]

Forgive me for my long-windedness below. I'll present my arguments, and I hope that someone can help me format an adequate proposal or proposals for the main page.

Eric has tried to claim that this is really just a dispute between him and two other editors, User:Coolcaesar and User:Will Beback. Nothing could be further from the truth. Eric's block log, for example, shows seven blocks by five different administrators. A look at the history page for the Anaheim Hills, Anaheim, California shows 7 different admins doing numerous page protections, semi-protections, and move protections because of the very persistent efforts of Eric to add misinformation and misleading information into the Anaheim Hills article, and to do edits and page moves against a clear consensus as shown on the talk page. Furthermore, you can see numerous editors who have reverted the edits of Eric because of problems with his edits. Yet Eric continued to ignore consensus and even ignore offered compromises during the 4+ months that he has been editing the Anaheim Hills, Anaheim, California article.

Then, if you look at the discussions on Talk:Anaheim Hills, Anaheim, California (and the three archive pages), as well as the discussions on numerous user talk pages, you can see that all of those administrators and editors have been very patient with Eric, despite his intransigence. Even Coolcaesar, notwithstanding his occasional intemperance in his edit summaries, has generally been very patient with Eric on the Talk pages. I think that all of the administrators involved in this case should be commended for their forbearance of Eric's behavior. BlankVerse 12:14, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbitration/Ericsaindon2/Workshop&oldid=1137443632"