Please follow up with me if you have any questions as to the changes i have made in Wiki. My purpose is only to be factual and accurate at all times.
I completely agree with your assessment of Objective3000.
Any external gambling website to which links are provided, other than to his qfit, blackincolor, blackjack-scam, and others, is deleted by him. His goal on WP is to provide a billboard for his highly priced CV software. Look, in particular, at "Card counting". Of the first 9 references, 5 are to his various cites. Of the first 16, I think 9 are to his various cites. They all prominently display CV software. Indeed, his profile refers ONLY to his CV software.
I’m new, but these external links should be replaced by links to primary sources. His websites simply regurgitate the work of others. I’m happy to help provide the primary sources as alternative references in this regard.
He should be barred from WP as SEVERE conflict of interest/marketing motivated. And his contentiousness and meanness should not be tolerated. He's not a scholar, but a businessman and he uses WP as low cost advertising. PhilippeMaurice ( talk) 14:28, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
Hi!
As I've been involved in arguments about this article, but do not want to continue, I thought it might help to ask for dispute resolution: see /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard
Regards Belle Fast ( talk) 07:53, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contribution(s). I am glad to see that you are discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, while user talk pages permit a small degree of generalisation, other talk pages such as Talk:WikiTree are strictly for discussing improvements to their associated main pages, and many of them have special instructions on the top. They are not a general discussion forum about the article's topic or any other topic. If you have questions or ideas and are not sure where to post them, consider asking at the Teahouse. Thanks. —DIYeditor ( talk) 08:15, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. —DIYeditor ( talk) 04:36, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
Deathmolor ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Your reason here Deathmolor ( talk) 14:52, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
Decline reason:
As you continue to your your talk page to launch personal attack after personal attack, I am withdrawing talk page access at this point. You can either go to WP:UTRS or Arbcom if you wish to be unblocked at this point. RickinBaltimore ( talk) 18:32, 5 August 2023 (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.
I also found this information:
"In extreme cases, even isolated personal attacks may lead to a block for disruption. Death threats and issues of similar severity may result in a block without warning. Lesser personal attacks often result in a warning, and a request to refactor. If a pattern of lesser personal attacks continues despite the warning, escalating blocks may follow. However, administrators are cautioned that other resolutions are preferable to blocking for less-severe situations when it is unclear if the conduct severely disrupts the project. Recurring attacks are proportionally more likely to be considered disruptive. Blocking for personal attacks should only be done for prevention, not punishment: a block may be warranted if it seems likely that the user will continue using personal attacks. " - quote from the rules used to ban.
The above is very interesting to me. When reading how the rules of banning are applied this ban seems to not fall in line with the rules. It would seem this ban is a punishment for exposing the very nature of the rules themselves by referring to them as paradoxical. This ban seems to further prove the point I was making.
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
Doug Weller
talk
07:50, 5 August 2023 (UTC)is closed. More tripe. -- Deepfriedokra ( talk) 19:13, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
is of sufficient merit that I would like to restore talk page access. @ RickinBaltimore: -- Deepfriedokra ( talk) 01:52, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
Which, by the way, is defunct so in any case no one could have granted you access. Doug Weller talk 13:47, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
@ Deathmolor:? I thought you knew how to use the unblock request template? To request unblocking, please place
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
at the bottom of your talk page, filling in "your reason here" by concisely and clearly describing how your editing merited a block, what you would do differently, and what constructive edits you would make.
Thanks -- Deepfriedokra ( talk) 02:29, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
It will come to pass eventually when there are another set of rules, that does not require me to wade into the wiki English bureaucracy. The courts will have to be involved to simplify this process.—DIYeditor ( talk) 11:04, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
UTRS appeal #77397 has been declined. JBW ( talk) 17:00, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
is open. @ RickinBaltimore and Doug Weller:. -- Deepfriedokra ( talk) 12:58, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
And was closed. -- Deepfriedokra ( talk) 11:30, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
Please follow up with me if you have any questions as to the changes i have made in Wiki. My purpose is only to be factual and accurate at all times.
I completely agree with your assessment of Objective3000.
Any external gambling website to which links are provided, other than to his qfit, blackincolor, blackjack-scam, and others, is deleted by him. His goal on WP is to provide a billboard for his highly priced CV software. Look, in particular, at "Card counting". Of the first 9 references, 5 are to his various cites. Of the first 16, I think 9 are to his various cites. They all prominently display CV software. Indeed, his profile refers ONLY to his CV software.
I’m new, but these external links should be replaced by links to primary sources. His websites simply regurgitate the work of others. I’m happy to help provide the primary sources as alternative references in this regard.
He should be barred from WP as SEVERE conflict of interest/marketing motivated. And his contentiousness and meanness should not be tolerated. He's not a scholar, but a businessman and he uses WP as low cost advertising. PhilippeMaurice ( talk) 14:28, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
Hi!
As I've been involved in arguments about this article, but do not want to continue, I thought it might help to ask for dispute resolution: see /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard
Regards Belle Fast ( talk) 07:53, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contribution(s). I am glad to see that you are discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, while user talk pages permit a small degree of generalisation, other talk pages such as Talk:WikiTree are strictly for discussing improvements to their associated main pages, and many of them have special instructions on the top. They are not a general discussion forum about the article's topic or any other topic. If you have questions or ideas and are not sure where to post them, consider asking at the Teahouse. Thanks. —DIYeditor ( talk) 08:15, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. —DIYeditor ( talk) 04:36, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
Deathmolor ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Your reason here Deathmolor ( talk) 14:52, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
Decline reason:
As you continue to your your talk page to launch personal attack after personal attack, I am withdrawing talk page access at this point. You can either go to WP:UTRS or Arbcom if you wish to be unblocked at this point. RickinBaltimore ( talk) 18:32, 5 August 2023 (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.
I also found this information:
"In extreme cases, even isolated personal attacks may lead to a block for disruption. Death threats and issues of similar severity may result in a block without warning. Lesser personal attacks often result in a warning, and a request to refactor. If a pattern of lesser personal attacks continues despite the warning, escalating blocks may follow. However, administrators are cautioned that other resolutions are preferable to blocking for less-severe situations when it is unclear if the conduct severely disrupts the project. Recurring attacks are proportionally more likely to be considered disruptive. Blocking for personal attacks should only be done for prevention, not punishment: a block may be warranted if it seems likely that the user will continue using personal attacks. " - quote from the rules used to ban.
The above is very interesting to me. When reading how the rules of banning are applied this ban seems to not fall in line with the rules. It would seem this ban is a punishment for exposing the very nature of the rules themselves by referring to them as paradoxical. This ban seems to further prove the point I was making.
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
Doug Weller
talk
07:50, 5 August 2023 (UTC)is closed. More tripe. -- Deepfriedokra ( talk) 19:13, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
is of sufficient merit that I would like to restore talk page access. @ RickinBaltimore: -- Deepfriedokra ( talk) 01:52, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
Which, by the way, is defunct so in any case no one could have granted you access. Doug Weller talk 13:47, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
@ Deathmolor:? I thought you knew how to use the unblock request template? To request unblocking, please place
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
at the bottom of your talk page, filling in "your reason here" by concisely and clearly describing how your editing merited a block, what you would do differently, and what constructive edits you would make.
Thanks -- Deepfriedokra ( talk) 02:29, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
It will come to pass eventually when there are another set of rules, that does not require me to wade into the wiki English bureaucracy. The courts will have to be involved to simplify this process.—DIYeditor ( talk) 11:04, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
UTRS appeal #77397 has been declined. JBW ( talk) 17:00, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
is open. @ RickinBaltimore and Doug Weller:. -- Deepfriedokra ( talk) 12:58, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
And was closed. -- Deepfriedokra ( talk) 11:30, 2 December 2023 (UTC)