User talk:Oe65

This account has been confirmed by a CheckUser as a sockpuppet of Webapp (talk · contribs · logs), and has been blocked indefinitely.
Please refer to editing habits or contributions of the sockpuppet for evidence. This policy subsection may be helpful.

Account information: block log – contribs – logs – abuse log – CentralAuth

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Oe65 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

having problems with an abusive sysop Hu12, repeatedly removing my fixes on the article here: http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/List_of_content_management_systems his reason has nothing what ever to do with the content of the fixes or request for cleaning the article.

Decline reason:

You may not create new accounts to circumvent a block, even if you feel the block is unjust. Please log in at your original account, and request an unblock there. — Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:18, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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 did not ask to open an account to circumvent a block, this is my account, I have contributed to an an article with several corrections and in return I got banned and blocked by a psychopath sysop, user Hu12. Instead of arguing back on these fixes he is stalking my discussion note, edit/delete them to hide evidence and then he blocks me.

List of abuses by Hu12:

One classic examples out of atleast one dozen others (!): http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&diff=213150399&oldid=213149345

"Abuser, sysop Hu12 is more concern about his/her own reputation then the facts. Now she/he blocks the entire page, removing 1 request for cleaning the page for dozens of CLEAR mistakes, 1 misleading logo/link of "free softwares portals", 6 corrections on fake GPL listed items (3 of them are clear try & buy) all which listed under GPL and "free software portals" logo, 2 dozen others with price ranging from 25-9000 usd also enjoy the self obsession of the abusive sysop. I am forwarding a complaint against this Maniac. Now he/she is desperately busy in "fighting back" her ego issues with conspiracy theories." (deleted/edited by abusive sysop Hu12).

1.) Repeated Editing/deleting of notes on discussion pages to hide his/her abuses.

2.) Repeated bocking of IPS, to prevent me from returning back my relevant notes.

3.) Removal of essential corrections on the article.

4.) Repeated blocking of IP, discussion pages and articles in order to create a confusion and hide my contributions.

5.) Personal actions while being a sysop, he certainly should have given up and ask someone else do the job for him/her.

My mistakes:

I did re register 3 new accounts to return back my fixes, well no one is perfect. But please get this maniac away from me.

i'm contacting the blocking admin. — Rlevse • Talk • 01:48, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia owes much of its success to its openness. However, that very openness sometimes attracts people who seek to exploit the site. Unfortunatly this is just such a case. Nothing much to add that hasn't already been covered here here and here. This spammer has been a disruptive and disputatious presence accross several wikimedia projects. --Hu12 (talk) 03:42, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Now this psycho (Hu12) is coming with conspiracy theories, can someone remove his flags so he stops abusing his sysop access? My updates were essential, the article we talk abut does require cleaning and it does provide wrong information about those CMS scripts with regards to their licenses. Example: WP can not tell visitors that a CMS is free and under GPL license (in dozens of instances!) while the vendors them self o not even claim so!

Hu12 is another issue that requires the attention of the democratic tools WP has or a real life therapist.