This user has been blocked
Welcome to Doomsday, Owen! It sounds like you have ideas for France: the 6th Republic. Are you planning on developing them farther? Is this a matter of the Southern Territories changing their name, or has some new community in metropolitan France emerged from the devastation? Benkarnell 22:16, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
I plan to develop this and considering French troops were stationed in africa countries such as Algeria survived and France survived notably becuse President Miterand signed a Non agression pact with the USSR in 1982 Owen1983 9 March 24:42 GMT
- OK, sounds reasonable. A couple of things:
- (1) Please read the Editorial guidelines for the 1983 project. Most important among them is to not override any previous work.
- (2) Please leave a comment at Talk:1983: Doomsday to discuss the new country.
- (3) Based on your edit at World Country Profiles (1983: Doomsday), it looks almost as though you're planning to change what's previously been written about France's overseas departements. Keep in mind that this material is already an accepted part of the timeline and shouldn't be changed without discussing it first. A number of other pages are written based on what's already been established about French Polynesia and Guyana.
- (4) I'm not sure about the non-agression pact. Was that real? If it wasn't, it shouldn't be added, since it represents another POD and would affect other events leading up to the 1983 war. It's certainly possible that a survivor government signed such a pact with a Soviet bloc state after the war. We've never really sorted out Corsica, for example, or any mainland bits of France that could have survived.
I suggest discussing your plans with the group before adding too much. As the group grows, keeping it all organized gets harder but more important. The worst thing would be to put a ton of work into something that ends up getting deleted or ignored because it goes against earlier work. Benkarnell 03:03, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
http://althistory.wikia.com/wiki/Timeline_(Evil_Empire) Comments and suggestions appreciated MC Prank 17:44, November 17, 2009 (UTC)
what we need is asuggestion page
rhis is were editors can suggest topics were users can vote yes or no this woul avoid editorial conflict Owen1983 10 March 12:53PM GMT
Just to point out...
Since I'm not sure if you will see my comments on the Talk:Timeline (1983: Doomsday), I would just like to point out that your to do list has been done:
- Overview Timeline (1983: Doomsday)
- India (1983: Doomsday)
- World Country Profiles (1983: Doomsday)
- South American Confederation (1983: Doomsday)
The message you responded to was over a year old, be more careful next time when reading a talk page. Mitro 15:44, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Since I am not the author of the article and I specifically said on said article's talk page that I am not interested on working on it, I am not sure why you are informing me about this. That being said, good luck with whatever it is you are planning to do with the article but do not contact me about it. Mitro 20:24, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
Owen -- remember that you need to have the name of the timeline in parenthesis after any page you create. Thus, LoN World Factbook needed to have (1983: Doomsday) after it. I have corrected the error. Please take care that it doesn't happen in the future.
Thanks. Louisiannan 21:38, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
There is no way JFK can succeed McArthur after losing the election to him a year before. That is not how American government works. McArthur's VP would succeed him and I highly doubt his VP would be his opponent in the last election. Mitro 15:37, September 28, 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for this info i will change it
- You seem to be ingnoring your talk page so I will say this again. There is no way JFK could succeed McArthur. JFK was not his VP. JFK ran against him in the last election and lost. If McArthur resigned he would be replaced by his VP, which would not be JFK. That is how the American system of succession works. If President Obama resigned today he would not be replaced by his opponent McCain, he would be replaced by his VP Biden.
- Please stop adding those edits about JFK succeeding McCarthur if he resigns. It is completely implausible. Mitro 15:40, September 29, 2009 (UTC)
I'm sorry to be blunt but your recent edit was ridiculous. McArthur was elected in 1960, the year the OTL US had a presidential election. THE US WOULD NOT HAVE ANOTHER PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION ONE A YEAR LATER! Please do some research before making edits to this page. If you continue to make such unconstructive edits to that article I will take necessary actions. Mitro 16:03, September 29, 2009 (UTC)
Why do you keep editing Mancunia? It's obsolete which basically means that we're too kind to throw it away, ie deleting it. I'm not saying its not allowed, but that your work now has no pertinence to the TL. Sorry, Mr.Xeight 23:23, November 16, 2009 (UTC)
as Manchester was nuked 26 years ago I have thaught that towns which were apart of tho old county of greater Manchester may have survived and faced with hardship may have joined other towns its logicoal thet would take Manchesters historic name--Owen1983 23:47, November 16, 2009 (UTC)
- "Greater Manchuria" would not survive. They would be too close to the blast radius that they would be extensively damaged and be abandoned. The populace would either die, find their way to an Ireland/CA refugee camp or the few lucky ones would catch a boat to New Britain. Mitro 00:08, November 17, 2009 (UTC)
I'm sorry, Owen, a consensus has already been made. If you'd like to make a spinoff in which a "Greater Mancunia" is a flourishing nation, then I personally see no problem; however, if you continue to edit the obsolete page we have on Manchester, you are simply wasting your time. Mr.Xeight 00:33, November 17, 2009 (UTC)
Making storyline decisions on articles you didn't create
Owen, I'm undoing your announcement on the WCRB headlines page re: Portland. (I'll roll with it, but my way). If you want to make changes like that on pages that I or anyone else created, that you didn't create or have a say in, please discuss it first on the talk page for that article.--BrianD 15:07, November 18, 2009 (UTC)
Editing articles with the sole purpose of adding spelling errors to them is by no means constructive and neither were your edits to the Guyana and Argentina articles (with the latter I'm even inclined to call it vandalism). Could you please refrain from such edits in the future? --Karsten vK (talk) 19:45, November 18, 2009 (UTC)
Be fair kirsten English is not my First Language--Owen1983 21:21, November 18, 2009 (UTC)
Can somone help me
I have been blocked fo no reason
YOU were blocked for severel reasons
1 vandelism 2 inserting nonsence into pages Masquerading as another user you should think yourself lucky that you were blocked for a month and not a year or or life what i suggest you do is learn from your mistakes and apply them to become a better person --Chip2008 02:04, November 19, 2009 (UTC)
Thankyou--Owen1983 02:36, November 19, 2009 (UTC)
- Did you actually mean to impersonate XiReney? Benkarnell 03:42, November 19, 2009 (UTC)
i sent him a mesage but I forgot to sign my name
so i went back to correct my mistake but Kirsten thaght I was inpersonatein hime but i wasnt and she said i have been making unproductive edits becus i mad a few spelling mistake and I have been blocked and i didnt do anything --Owen1983 11:52, November 19, 2009 (UTC)
- Firstly spelling errors had absolutely nothing to do with the block, which was in fact issued for the following reasons:
- Messing up the formatting of the Falkland Islands article.
- Removing the proposal tag from the Guyana article which, if you had bothered to read the discussion on which, was in no position to be canonised.
- Vandalising the Argentina article by tagging this long standing canon article with the obsolete template.
- Pointlessly inserting the stub template on several pages that already had the stub template on them.
- More seriously: Continuing with this after having been asked to cease this activity.
- I think all of this together would have only lead to a second warning, or at worst, a one day block. It is the perceived impersonation shown here that formed the bulk of the reasoning behind the block. Since I now suppose this interpretation was an error on my behalf, the one day worst-case-scenario has passed, and Ben himself has objected to the block, I will lift the block after posting this message. My apologies for the erroneous judgement and once again a request to please don't make edits of the kind listed in the summary above any-more. --Karsten vK (talk) 12:44, November 19, 2009 (UTC)
- Firstly spelling errors had absolutely nothing to do with the block, which was in fact issued for the following reasons:
THANKS KIRSTEN --Owen1983 19:06, November 19, 2009 (UTC)
Iowa was not deleted: Republic of Iowa (1983: Doomsday)
You probably just spelled it wrong. Mitro 05:33, November 23, 2009 (UTC)
Concerning Recent Events
I recommend next time Owen that you do not get involved in situations like these. Due to your ignorance of the situation you caused issues that could have been avoided. Next time just contact an admin like myself and leave it at that. It was not necessary for you to start telling editors what to do or make statements about them that were untrue.
And once again please don't call me "Mat." I have never asked anyone to call me that. I would appreciate if you would refer to me as "Mitro." Mitro 23:01, December 6, 2009 (UTC)
thanks mitro --Owen1983 01:04, December 7, 2009 (UTC)
Owen, I investigated your report of vandalism. First off the anon did not remove an image from Timeline as you reported. What he did was add a link to a new article he was proposing, and you removed it for no reason and then lied about your reason. This is your last warning Owen, do something like this again and I will block you from editing for 3 days. Mitro 22:01, December 9, 2009 (UTC)
Owen, why did you create this article, especially given that it totally contradicted what was already in the sports by country and in the ANZC articles? Talk pages are the place to discuss proposals like this. And, it showed a total disregard for not only what I did in the ANZC and the sports by country pages, but also for the proposal Jnjaycpa is working on. --BrianD 15:44, December 21, 2009 (UTC)
I thaught it was Australian not American --Owen1983 18:16, December 21, 2009 (UTC)
- Even so, it was clearly listed as an American football league in the item, and there is already a soccer league in the ANZC in this timeline, the A-League. --BrianD 19:10, December 21, 2009 (UTC)
Soviet defeat is already a featured ATL, did you not see the big template on top of the portal page? Mitro 02:10, December 22, 2009 (UTC)
Redoing the infobox
I changed the title of my article and deleted the infobox you put in. Would you be able to put the infobox back in???
Verence71 10:15, December 26, 2009 (UTC)
Why did you remake a page on the Unity League, but then talk about Madagascar and the Comoros Islands? Mr.Xeight 17:33, December 28, 2009 (UTC)
Madagascer and a small part of madagascer consist of the UL after DD madagascer escaped the trauma at griped africa but they had a problem of pirate raids from the mainland so the UL came about BTW I read your post about the UL membersip of the Lon I want to say thanks for taking an interest in my article and I hope you have a great new year --Owen1983 13:49, December 29, 2009 (UTC)
- Owen, the comment made by Mr. X was written on June 4, 2009, did you not see the date? Then the Unity League was a unified government of Greece and Turkey. That version of the UL was rejected from the 1983: Doomsday canon and later deleted upon request by Mr. X. Furthermore there already is an article on Madagascar: Madagascar (1983: Doomsday). It is relatively empty but it still exists. Now, however, you have resurrected a deleted page and have used it to describe a nation that already has an article in the TL. Mitro 13:59, December 29, 2009 (UTC)
No actually it won't, and I request you stay out of it, regardless of how you consider your relationship to the admins of this wiki. I asked Louis for his opinion, not you. Mitro 16:47, December 30, 2009 (UTC)
Louis gave you an answer and i only posted a fallow up the reason I did is i viewed this situation as a delicate matter which need as much input as possible if you request that I stay out of this thats ok but not for this situation becise any rash decisions will damage the credibility of the TSPTF --Owen1983 17:22, December 30, 2009 (UTC)
- Owen, please. Even Louis has asked you to stay out of it. We are handling this situation, we do not need your input. Mitro 17:31, December 30, 2009 (UTC)
After discussion among the administrators, we have decided to decline your application to join the TSPTF. We currently have enough members to patrol the wiki and are not interested in expanding at the moment. We appreciate your efforts in helping fight vandalism and you are welcome to try again later. Mitro 17:16, December 31, 2009 (UTC)
- 90% of his "articles written or contributed to" don't have any edits from him or if they do they were undone immediately after as well.--Oerwinde 09:57, January 8, 2010 (UTC)
Well, I didn't want to be accusatory and come out and say it, but that is 100% stealing. Owen, please delete your contributions/creations page before I do it for you. Mr.Xeight 04:17, January 15, 2010 (UTC)
I don't know if you've heard of the Wikination Lovia, but we are currently being ruled by a despot and need to recruit members to our party (Communist) in order to topple him. It would be great if you took part. Otherwise, you can help simply by adding your name to the list of members. Thank you! LCP
Owen, the process for graduating articles is clearly marked in the Editorial Guidelines. I have noticed that recently you have been ignoring it and graduating articles without following the guidelines. While anyone can graduate an article, we have specific procedures in place to catch contradictory or implausible content. Since you have been warned by me and other editors to refrain from graduating articles without following the guidelines, this will be considered your last warning. If you do it again I will block you from editing for three days. If you have any questions, feel free to message me. Mitro 16:03, January 12, 2010 (UTC)
I am very glad you have decided to join the LCP, the Lovian Communist Party, on Wikination (Lovia). We can always use new members. Only by a large ammount of followers will we able to secure our position in the government and become both a large aswell as an influential political party. Godspeed, comrade Owen! ;) Dr. Magnus 16:41, January 12, 2010 (UTC)
- I would like you to become more active at [Lovia if you wanted to. We can really use a helping hand out there. The LCP needs you and your vote in the elections. In order for you to be able to vote in the elections you will require 50 edits on wikination. Elections run until the 27th of january 2010. See you there. Dr. Magnus 16:48, January 13, 2010 (UTC)
Bentwaters/Woodbridge Military Government
Thanks for the minor edits you made :)
Verence71 16:02, January 13, 2010 (UTC)
Owen, take down those AH's that you have listed in your creations. They are not yours, that's incredibly rude and quite possibly illegal for you to do. Mr.Xeight 19:57, January 18, 2010 (UTC)
- Mr. X is right. Both of the timelines you claimed to have written on your user page have been written by other users (Likem96 created Communist Timeline and Buk5 created Soviet defeat). Taking credit for other people's work is not going to be tolerated at this wiki. You have 24 hours to remove your claim of authorship or else you will be blocked from editing. Mitro 17:46, January 21, 2010 (UTC)
- I will chime in. Owen, I think you can agree that we have shown incredible patience with some of your behavior on-wiki. This latest episode of you claiming credit for other people's work (which has been going on for a few weeks now) is completely unacceptable. Many people have asked you nicely to remove those comments. I'll support Mitro's warning: delete them or face a one week ban. Benkarnell 21:31, January 21, 2010 (UTC) he never gave me a chance the reason why i didnt remove them i i was working till 5 yesterday so i got some food and I had to go to the aipot 2 pick my friend up wich is the other side 2 were I live and the flight was delayed and it was 11:00pm when i got in so i went 2 bed Owen1983 19:09, January 22, 2010 (UTC)
Your reply was quite rude, an apology and explanation might be nice as well. Mr.Xeight 01:48, January 22, 2010 (UTC) if you thaught my message was rude i will apologise Owen1983 19:09, January 22, 2010 (UTC)
Per the reasoning above, you have been blocked for one week because of plagiarism. Owen, at the end of your blocking period you will be given another 24 hours to remove your alleged authorship of the timelines on your user page. If you still have not removed the content, you will be blocked for a month. Mitro 17:24, January 22, 2010 (UTC)
were I live plagerism aplies to copywrited material since i contributed heavily to them they are min and you have threatened me before once was about the proposals tag then i found out you ore somone alse removed il take this to the wikia staff because in my state I nothing wrong and you are threatening me Owen1983 18:47, January 22, 2010 (UTC)
- In a legal sense, I suppose, plagiarism means stealing copyrighted material. But this is a creative writing wiki, and when you claim someone else's writing as your own (copywrighted or not), it damages the quality of the site, and it really damages our community. That's both the community here on this site, and the wider alternate history/constructed culture community on the Web. Other people put a lot of work into those projects, and it is not acceptable for you to pretend that you did the work. If you take this to Wikia, I do not think they will be very sympathetic. In a school, a stdent can be busted for plagiarism if they copy another student; and here, you cannot impersonate another editor. 22.214.171.124 19:56, January 22, 2010 (UTC) (Benkarnell)
in what whay Am i damaging this community I have contributed to those tlsOwen1983 20:03, January 22, 2010 (UTC)
- Simply contributing to a TL never allows you to claim you created them. Furthermore your contributions to Soviet defeat have been incredibly minor and claiming you are the author as you do on your user page is a slap in the face to Buk5 (the actual creator of the TL). Also your "contributions" include creating an article that was immediately rewritten by Das Taub and a few minor changes to the TL and portal page. Under your logic I can correct one typo and create a stub and claim to be the creator of the timeline.
- Simply put Owen you are taking credit for others work. It says on your user page, and I quote, "TLs I have created." It is then followed by two TLs you have not created. I fail to see how you did not do anything wrong in this situation. This is the same situation if you were to take someone's report, cross of their name and put down your own, and turn it in and claim you wrote it.
- Furthermore don't say you were not given a chance to remove them. On January 18th Mr. X asked you to remove the offending content and you replied to him on the 19th that you would not. You weren't blocked until the 22nd, 3 days after you refused to remove it. I fail again to see how you were not given enough time. Mitro 23:41, January 22, 2010 (UTC)
- MrX8 first asked Owen to take it down on the 8th, not the 18th. It's been two weeks. Benkarnell 23:50, January 22, 2010 (UTC)
the soviet defeat article was abandoned so i adopted it check out the historyOwen1983 14:36, January 23, 2010 (UTC)
- That is a lie. If you atually look at the history of the portal page you can see that Buk5, Das Taub and Katholico have all been working on it before and after your one small edit to the article. It has not been abandoned. In fact I believe it is time that I bring Buk5 into this conversation, I'm sure he has something to say to the person taking credit for his work. Mitro 14:45, January 23, 2010 (UTC)
I meant communist timelin soviet defeat is buk5s work and I have not edited Owen1983 14:51, January 23, 2010 (UTC)
- If its Buk5's work, why did you write on your user page you created it? Futhermore you have edited it, check the history of the portal page just like you told me to. Mitro 14:58, January 23, 2010 (UTC)
here is the history were are the edits you are covinced are mine
- ) 07:33, January 13, 2010 Das Taub (Talk | contribs) (11,024 bytes) (undo)
- (cur) (prev) 11:43, December 27, 2009 Buk5 (Talk | contribs) (10,876 bytes) (undo)
- (cur) (prev) 12:12, December 26, 2009 Buk5 (Talk | contribs) (10,608 bytes) (undo)
- (cur) (prev) 00:13, December 26, 2009 Das Taub (Talk | contribs) (10,551 bytes) (undo)
- (cur) (prev) 17:10, December 24, 2009 Katholico (Talk | contribs) (10,522 bytes) (undo)
- (cur) (prev) 17:10, December 24, 2009 Katholico (Talk | contribs) (10,521 bytes) (undo)
- (cur) (prev) 15:35, December 24, 2009 Owen1983 (Talk | contribs) (10,581 bytes) (undo)
- (cur) (prev) 16:47, December 23, 2009 Buk5 (Talk | contribs) (10,560 bytes) (undo)
- (cur) (prev) 19:27, December 16, 2009 Das Taub (Talk | contribs) (10,465 bytes) (→WWCRI - your news from across the world) (undo)
- (cur) (prev) 17:45, December 16, 2009 Buk5 (Talk | contribs) (10,416 bytes) (undo)
- (cur) (prev) 23:13, December 15, 2009 Das Taub (Talk | contribs) (10,382 bytes) (→WWCRI - your news from across the world) (undo)
- (cur) (prev) 09:29, December 3, 2009 Das Taub (Talk | contribs) (10,064 bytes) (→WWCRI - your news from across the world) (undo)
- (cur) (prev) 02:15, November 30, 2009 Das Taub (Talk | contribs) (9,933 bytes) (→WWCRI - your news from across the world) (undo)
- (cur) (prev) 21:35, November 26, 2009 Das Taub (Talk | contribs) (9,622 bytes) (undo)
- (cur) (prev) 19:43, November 21, 2009 Buk5 (Talk | contribs) (9,525 bytes) (undo)
- (cur) (prev) 12:28, November 21, 2009 Hellerick (Talk | contribs) (8,806 bytes) (undo)
- (cur) (prev) 13:06, November 18, 2009 Buk5 (Talk | contribs) (8,806 bytes) (undo)
- (cur) (prev) 14:55, November 14, 2009 Buk5 (Talk | contribs) (8,663 bytes) (undo)
- (cur) (prev) 03:26, November 11, 2009 Mitro (Talk | contribs) (7,605 bytes) (undo)
- (cur) (prev) 20:38, October 24, 2009 Buk5 (Talk | contribs) (7,615 bytes) (undo)
- (cur) (prev) 00:03, October 18, 2009 Das Taub (Talk | contribs) (6,959 bytes) (→Technology) (undo)
- (cur) (prev) 10:07, October 17, 2009 Buk5 (Talk | contribs) (6,833 bytes) (undo)
- (cur) (prev) 20:59, October 16, 2009 Buk5 (Talk | contribs) (6,144 bytes) (undo)
- (cur) (prev) 16:29, October 14, 2009 Mitro (Talk | contribs) (6,018 bytes) (undo)
- (cur) (prev) 16:28, October 14, 2009 Buk5 (Talk | contribs) (5,995 bytes) (undo)
- (cur) (prev) 21:55, August 30, 2009 Buk5 (Talk | contribs) (5,973 bytes) (undo)
- (cur) (prev) 20:19, August 30, 2009 Buk5 (Talk | contribs) (5,973 bytes) (undo)
- (cur) (prev) 10:56, August 29, 2009 Buk5 (Talk | contribs) (5,738 bytes) (undo)
- (cur) (prev) 09:17, August 23, 2009 Buk5 (Talk | contribs) (5,160 bytes) (undo)
- (cur) (prev) 15:27, August 12, 2009 Buk5 (Talk | contribs) (3,577 bytes) (i do not rally see how conservative = fascist, since Wisnton Churchill, an ardent anti-fascist, was conservative.) (undo)
- (cur) (prev) 04:45, August 11, 2009 YNot1989 (Talk | contribs) (3,681 bytes) (→Political differences from OTL) (undo)
- (cur) (prev) 04:41, August 11, 2009 YNot1989 (Talk | contribs) (3,285 bytes) (→Technology) (undo)
- (cur) (prev) 04:32, August 11, 2009 YNot1989 (Talk | contribs) (2,613 bytes) (→Cultural differences from OTL) (undo)
- (cur) (prev) 19:24, August 10, 2009 Buk5 (Talk | contribs) (2,373 bytes) (undo)
- (cur) (prev) 16:33, August 10, 2009 Buk5 (Talk | contribs) (1,740 bytes) (undo)
- (cur) (prev) 21:17, August 8, 2009 Buk5 (Talk | contribs) (1,401 bytes) (undo)
- (cur) (prev) 16:27, August 8, 2009 Buk5 (Talk | contribs) (1,243 bytes) (undo)
- (cur) (prev) 14:08, May 21, 2009 Buk5 (Talk | contribs) (224 bytes) (undo)
- (cur) (prev) 14:04, May 21, 2009 Buk5 (Talk | contribs)
- You're kidding me right? How about the one that says it was done by Owen1983? In case you can't see it I bolded it for you. Is that not your name? Also what is with the sudden change of story? Just yesterday you said "I have contributed to those tls", now you are saying you have never contributed to one them. You are contradicting yourself.
- Owen the fact of the matter is that on your user page you claim to have created two timelines that we know for a fact that you did not create. You have already told a member of the TSPTF that you would not remove them. Because of that you have been blocked for a week. When your block is over you will be given another 24 hours to remove the statement or else you will be blocked again.
- Finally, Owen nothing you can say can change the fact that on your user page it says you are claiming to have created TLs that you did not create. Your arguments are contradictory and I am tired of going in circles with you. I will contact you again to warn you when your block is over, but until then I am uninterrested in continuing this conversation. If you wish to remain a member of this Wiki, I recomend a serious change of attitude. Mitro 03:12, January 24, 2010 (UTC)
- Owen, your block ends today. After your block ends you have 24 hours to remove the false statements from your user page. If you do so you may continue being an editor on this wiki. If you do not you will be blocked for a month and I will remove the statements myself. Mitro 14:13, January 29, 2010 (UTC)
Ty Owen1983 17:05, January 29, 2010 (UTC)
it seem you are correct
I did make an eddit to the soviet defeat articleOwen1983 16:26, January 24, 2010 (UTC)
I can see on your takpage rhat on ten occasions you have been spoken to by admins and another user about your conduct but taking cred for articles you didn't create is out of order and must not continue you wer told to delete them in which you refused to do and were given 24 hours to remove them but this didn't happan and you are not being bullied IMO the Admins and community have being very understanding with you 126.96.36.199 17:03, January 25, 2010 (UTC) (chip2007)
Did you Honestly Think You Were Done
Listen to me, and listen good.
- You still have a lot of housekeeping to do; articles like the Parthenopean Republic you didn't even contribute to at all. Hey, if you want, keep it up; we'll just ban you for a month this time, we're all going to enjoy doing it, you've been quite an anathema to us for quite some time. If you have any problems talk to me as an adult, don't leave topics without text on my talk page that doesn't have a single word typed correctly or contain proper grammar or syntax.
Mr.Xeight 02:10, February 6, 2010 (UTC)
Do not lie to me, Owen. That IP adress only shows two edits. You have edited in anon form before, the contributions page would have shown other, older edits. Every time you lie in gets EVERYONE here at AltHist wiki more and more angry at you. My advice to you is leave before you get a permanent ban, it's only a matter of time, my friend. Mr.Xeight 02:40, February 6, 2010 (UTC)
"Adopted" pages and the rest of the list
What MrXeight says above is true. You've made incredibly minor edits to most of those pages: for Quad Cities, you added a single sentence that's not in the current version anyway. For Belau, all you did was remove a proposal tag. But by far the worst claim on your list is the claim that you "adopted" Blond Death. Fero created that timeline yesterday. You've had enough warnings. I'm instituting the one-month ban that we said would happen next time you did this. You can keep discussing it here if you feel it's unfair, but I feel you are getting exactly what you were told would happen, the next time you took credit for other people's pages. Benkarnell 02:56, February 6, 2010 (UTC)
- I apologize for the misunderstanding around Blond Death. Nevertheless, I feel that the block is justified because of the other pages on that list. It is misleading to say you wrote (or even "contributed to") a page when all you did was insert a single sentence or make a similarly unimportant edit. Benkarnell 17:09, February 8, 2010 (UTC)
Thankyou benOwen1983 18:10, February 8, 2010 (UTC)
Kingdom of Albion
Owen, in regards to your Kingdom of Albion article, both Cleveland and Northumbria are Smoggy's works. You might want to talk to her first before you use her material in one of your own articles. Mitro 21:38, September 3, 2010 (UTC)
the kingdom of Albion is a successor state to Kingdom of Cleveland (1983: Doomsday) and the Kingdom of Northumbria (1983: Doomsday) anyways I will check the talkpage--Owen1983 12:48, September 4, 2010 (UTC)
- I understand that Owen, hence why I said you should check with her before using her material. Mitro 14:25, September 4, 2010 (UTC)
as i'm writing Northumbria, Cleveland and Rheghed dont you think i should be writing that?, plus it will be in the FAR FAR future that the kingdom of Albion will come into effect once two monarchs have passed through both the thrones of Northumbria and Cleveland.
if you want to write a doomsday page have a look at Shropshire and/or the surrounding area as there aren't many nuke hits round that area instead of trying to hijack any of my pages, thanks--Smoggy80 17:59, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
188.8.131.52 20:07, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
Those haven't been researched at all. I specifically said that you made them, and only put them on the page because you have not.
They are just further attempts to let your precious Manchester live.
You call that attacking your work? Needs to be actual work first, buddy.
Lordganon 14:03, September 7, 2010 (UTC)
I'm aware of that, though you don't seem to be. Ya completely missed what I said.
Lordganon 22:26, September 7, 2010 (UTC)
I doubt that to be true, given your continued insistence on going against the work of others around here.
Your asking Louis if you could join the TSPTF proves your goals on the matter. You will not get that on here, ever.
Go back to your alien wiki, please.
Lordganon 03:27, September 10, 2010 (UTC)
Owen, I have warned you before about removing proposal and obsolete banners when you have no reason to. Do it again and I will block you from editing. Mitro 00:45, September 9, 2010 (UTC)
- Actually Owen it is not your decision whether your articles remain obsolete or not. If you actually ever bothered to read the Editorial Guidelines or pay attention to how things are done on this TL, it is the community as a whole who decides that. The community at the main talk page decided your article should not be canon and thus was marked as obsolete. Mitro 03:27, September 10, 2010 (UTC)
Your "Request" To Join The TSPTF
I am writing you on your recent "request" to join the TSPTF, Mr Nolan. I must say that this is quite impossible. To be perfectly frank, the reasons are simple. It's because most (if not all) of your recent proposals are nothing but pure ASB. You cling to the idea that Manchester was not nuked, when the entire community has decided you are wrong. You have recently caused trouble for you fellow users (such as Lordganon). You have meddled with Smoggy's plans for the future Kingdom of Albion. The thing is you fail to realize that while alternate history did not happen (thus why it is called alternate history) it is still history, and not some kind of fantasy world where anything can happen. It needs to be plausible, but you have failed to realize that. last but not least, you seem to barely know how to write English, and frankly you are a grade A spammer. You ram your changes down everyone's throats and naiively hope they get graduated. You have barely been back a week and already you have driven pretty much everyone up the wall. I must say that until you fix these numerous flaws it will be quite impossible to join the TSPTF, Mr Nolan. Membership in the TSPTF is a reward that only good, hardworking users can get.
Yankovic270 16:56, September 10, 2010 (UTC)
Let's be honest, shall we? When was the last time you posted an article or message that:
A) had correct spelling?
B) wasn't complete spam?
C) was a valuable adition to canon
D) had extensive content more than a few sentances?
E) wasn't immediately rejected?
Yankovic270 17:48, September 15, 2010 (UTC)
Don't try victimizing yourself Owen. I know where Manchester, England is, and I am an American. I can tell you the name and location of most counties of Ireland and Scotland by heart. Just because you know where North Carolina is does not give you a ticket into adopting the article. However North Americans, including both Canadians and Americans have more knowledge on the area than you would have. For example, you do not know the true difference between the North and the South in the United States, the accents of our states, or the fact that each state is pretty much a self-governing nation. A Canadian would not know as much but they would know a bit because American history occasionally shows up in Canadian textbooks and many Canadians move to the US temporarily for work and might gather knowledge on their temporary home state.
I'm fine with you working on Elizabeth City, and I can fix your grammar if you like, but just leave the North Carolina article to the Southerners.
PS, Owen, your spelling counts. Please, just for once capitalize your nouns and add periods! People would take you much more seriously I bet. Arstarpool 00:33, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
Owen, I know that you're probably only trying to help, but please refrain from adding new sections without checking with me first, particuarly when it's important stuff like Law and Order.Tessitore 15:08, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
Adoption of Liberal Ronald Regan
Owen I blocked you for 24 hours for your Life in the Duchy of Lancaster article. I can't count the number of times I and others have warned you about following the namining conventions of this wiki. Considering your recent behavior, I have no choice but to no longer be lenient with you when it comes to the rules. I suggest you learn to follow them in the future. Mitro 03:25, September 14, 2010 (UTC)
- Furthermore you again failed to mark a 1983DD article as a proposal in violation of the Editorial Guidelines. Mitro 03:26, September 14, 2010 (UTC)
I have spoken to wikia staff
naming conventions are not a blockable offense SO it is unjust--Owen1983 04:03, September 14, 2010 (UTC)
- That is your opinion Owen, but the block still stands. I have watched you violate the naming conventions for over a year now. Hopefully this will teach you to follow the rules next time. Mitro 13:42, September 14, 2010 (UTC)
Since I will not be available when your block ends later today, I wanted to take this opportunity to speak to you about how things are going to be different on this wiki concerning your behavior.
You have been a member of this wiki for more than a year now. During that time you have consistently violated or ignored the rules of this wiki (i.e. the naming conventions) or the rules of individual timelines, such as the Editorial Guidelines of 1983: Doomsday. Such behavior is forgivable for a new editor, but not someone with your experience with our operations. The only reasons I can think of for your flagrant violations of the rules is because you either intend to break them or you just don’t care.
Furthermore, your recent return to this wiki has shown that you have gotten worse. You have at one point hijacked Smoggy’s work, attempted again to get a Manchester survivor state in 1983: Doomsday, removed banners from articles without permission and generally been uncivil to other editors. In fact I and other members of the TSPTF have been showered with complaints about you since you returned. This cannot continue.
The leniency you have received from other administrators is over. For now on any violation of any of the rules of this wiki will be met with blocks that will increase in length for every time I must block you. I can no longer allow you to run amok here without any consequences. You might consider this unfair, or that I am “victimizing” you, but what you fail to realize is that you have acted this way since you started here without anyone willing to tell you that you need to conform your actions to the rules of this wiki. The only victims here are the people who have to constantly take time from their own creations to correct your mistakes and remind you not to do it again.
The rest is up to you Owen. You can either continue business as usual and claim that you are a victim, or do what every other editor here has no problem doing, which is following the rules. It is your choice and it is really not a hard one to make.
Mitro 20:58, September 14, 2010 (UTC)
Life in the Duchy of Lancaster (1983: Doomsday)
Hi, Owen 1983:
I noticed that you recently created the following article: Life in the Duchy of Lancaster (1983: Doomsday). Because there is really no need for an extra page like this we cannot entirely fill up with much information, I proposed on the talk page of the article it be merged into the regular Duchy of Lancaster article as an added section. (With the consent of the article's caretaker, of course) I suppose it would seem all right about life post-Doomsday in general, but an added page like this about a specific article, in my opinion, should really be merged with the main article. --Emperor of Trebizond 21:44, September 14, 2010 (UTC)
- As I've said on the Lancaster talkpage, Owen's article contains nothing that's any use to me, either because it's too vague and generalized or because it contradicts what I've got planned.Tessitore 16:29, September 15, 2010 (UTC)
I asked politely and did not make a decision, sir. It was a mere suggestion and the one that seemed the most logical on this wiki. It is not my fault that you are getting blocked by the administrators here and I wasn't trying to create more trouble for you.--Emperor of Trebizond 19:10, September 15, 2010 (UTC)
The writings on the wall
I suggest what you do if you want to stay here is understand the rules and when you receive a block do not go crying to wikia staff try listening
Kingdom of Shropshire
Keep in mind that other surrounding counties such as Staffordshire, Worchestershire and Herefordshire were also lightly irradiated and could've been included in any new Kingdom based around Shropshire.--Smoggy80 16:31, September 17, 2010 (UTC)
Owen, quit editing it. You've no right to make such pointless, error-filled edits to it.
Lordganon 12:10, September 27, 2010 (UTC)
You still have no permission to do so, which is the point.
Lordganon 12:34, September 27, 2010 (UTC)
As far as I am concerned, you already have ruined it. You have no sense of how the English language works at all, and it shows.
Lordganon 02:34, September 30, 2010 (UTC)
Agreed. Owen, please, we don't want you here at all. Leave! You won't be the caretaker because Jay is still an active contributor, stupid! Read the editorial guidelines! Arstar [talk] 02:55, September 30, 2010 (UTC)
had enogh of been blocked
While I don't want to seem harsh, I can think of several reasons why you have been banned.
- You seemingly have no idea to spell even the simplest of words correctly. (For example; you misspelled "Enough" in this section's title)
- You have repeatedly ignored canon to write whatever you want. (The many, many times Syou insisted that Manchester wasn't nuked come to mind)
- The articles that might be salvageable have completely irrational content. (Pretty much every article you've written counts as an example)
- The good ideas are never developed enough, and are pretty much abandoned after a few extremely misspelled and/or irrational sentence fragments. (Though considering the last point, this might be for the best.)
Yankovic270 13:19, September 30, 2010 (UTC)
Yank summed it up rather well, but the main reason is that you have edited articles and inserted gibberish. Arstar and Lordg both asked you to stop but you refused. So you have been blocked for three days. --Zack 17:19, September 30, 2010 (UTC)
when I was asked to stop editing i did do and let me some up edits which you think are gibberish I expanded the article and added information on the black forest--Owen1983 21:33, September 30, 2010 (UTC)
- Relax guys, he's been blocked for three days. I'll extend it further if he keeps up with these unprofessional actions but for now please be civil. --Zack 02:59, October 1, 2010 (UTC)
Owen, your command of the English language leaves much to desired. May I suggest reading articles in order to improve your own grammer, punctuation and spelling?HAD 18:04, October 5, 2010 (UTC)
thanks chip Owen1983 16:17, October 5, 2010 (UTC)
Why have you set up Provincial United Kingdom (1983: Doomsday)?? this organisation already exists as the OBN. I'm fairly sure you've asked someone if you could set it up (i can't remember where?) and was told that it was not needed? unless you've got it into your head to take over that lands already claimed by members of the OBN? which i can tell you will NOT go down well!--Smoggy80 18:17, October 5, 2010 (UTC)
- I have selected the region and on the map former UK 2010 i have pick the unclaimed areas byt I think due to radiation they would b unpopulated. --Owen1983 18:21, October 5, 2010 (UTC)
Just a quick one - If the area is unpopulated and irradiated how do you expect a nation to be formed? Plus SPELLING owen your going to have to learn to proof read stuff before you post it!--Smoggy80 18:26, October 5, 2010 (UTC)
I've had a look at the page again. Please tell me you're not trying to land-grab Celtic Alliance territory in Cornwall and Devon???--Smoggy80 16:03, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
You can't give back land that is not yours?? it is CELTIC ALLIANCE LAND, this is established canon, please learn that you CANNOT just go against canon because you fancy it! or you will find yourself barred AGAIN!!!--Smoggy80 16:58, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
I have blocked you for a week. Your actions in regards to the Provisional United Kingdom (1983: Doomsday) have shown that you have no respect for the works of others or respecting the rules of the 1983: Doomsday TL. You cannot appeal this. Mitro 17:15, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
Mitro, please, why cant you just perma-ban him? Arstar 17:22, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- How about this: Owen, if you get blocked (for whatever reason) you will be blocked permanently. I am done with this sliding scale. Mitro 17:26, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
HOW ABOUT THIS MITRO
I have turned over a new leaf and still you choose to block me and i can only reason you have something against me so i think a letter to this wikis owner might be in order dont you --Owen1983 18:10, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
Turned over a new leaf? Only if it's a Moebius strip! Fegaxeyl 18:12, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Owen do not threaten me. Wikia does not get involved with the internal affairs of the individual wikis. Even if they did, they would agree that my actions were in the right. So go ahead and write your letter, and please send me a copy. Mitro 18:17, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
What about getting a vote of the TSPTF members? and try and find one that'll vote to keep Owen on this Wiki?--Smoggy80 18:20, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- I vote to block him--Smoggy80 18:20, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- I also move to block him. Yankovic270 18:35, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- I vote to ban him perm. Arstar 18:41, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Perhaps a 1000 year ban ala Cathrine is necessary. Look at his block history folks. --Zack 18:49, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Lieutenant Zack, remove his 1 week block and permaban him. Are there any objections to not perma-baning him? --Arstar 19:30, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
I will if no one objects. Make note of it on the TSPTF talk page. --Zack 21:07, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
I object --Owen1983 23:19, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
Ok course you would object dumbass! Zack, go through with it. Owen! We gave you a million chances! You are an insult to the Eastern Hemisphere! Arstar 03:30, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
You dont get a vote Owen! you are not a member of the TSPTF, and for very good reasons i might add!--Smoggy80 10:06, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
- User:Owen1983 has appeared to me in our encounters on the site as ranging from rude to reasonable. Irritating as he may be to the staff of this wikia, I don't believe he has done quite the ultimate deed that deserves him to be blocked permanently. Despite his long history of blocks, I suggest perhaps the TSPTF can come to a compromise, since he sometimes seems to mean well.
- If you insist on blocking this user, I propose blocking him for one year, not permanently. Many things can change in the year, and, on the other hand, most blocked users don't come back after that amount of time. I apologize if I am meddling in a contemplation or a discussion I should have no part in. I hope that, in all fairness to both the user and the community, I am doing the right thing by voicing my opinion.--Emperor of Trebizond 00:31, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
- Emperor, in all kindness, diplomacy has failed. He has been on and off of blocks for 2 years now and nobody likes him spamming and making nonsensical edits. It's in the hands of the TSPTF, and we will most likely see him blocked in some form or another. But give him the one year block. We'll see if he ever comes back, if he does, and doesn't show proper usage of the English grammar and understanding of how to use the wiki, he will be permabanned. How about that guys? Arstar 03:41, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
I know it's Owen, and I know how maddening and frustrating he can be to deal with. Let's be civil with Owen, but let's be firm, too. I am against a permanent ban for now, but I do think some kind of lengthy ban is in order, especially given how patient Mitro and others have been with Owen and how many second, third, fourth and more chance he's received. Mitro, what is the TSPTF's procedure in dealing with this kind of situation?--BrianD 04:37, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
this user may be frustrating but at the end of the day he means well and has shown enthusiasm to 1983 doomsday. thus I think a permaban is not necessary. Martin 10:49, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
He may have shown enthusiasm for DD but he has shown total disregard for exisiting canon also! and despite repeated warnings he continued to add somewhat bizzare content no matter what other contributers said. He's been barred several times over the past couple of years, and he still hasn't got why he got barred all those times. He's never going to learn, so even if he does get banned for a year if or when he comes back he'll be the same and we'll all be having this same conversation one year from now. Why have all that hassle? just ban him permanently.--Smoggy80 10:01, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
You did nothing for that article. And Owen, we can tell it is you that is editing the page as this "Martin" character.
I believe that the pretending to be someone else here, defending himself from his own account, means he should be gone for good.
Lordganon 11:02, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
Martin or should i say Owen! Iowa is a four line stub not exactly a massivly influentual article! plus it was marked as obselete and someone (you probably!) took the banner off without approval. For God's, Allah, Budda or who ever the hell you believe in give it up, be a man, just quit and leave quietly !!! and DO NOT TRY AND LOG IN AS SOMEONE ELSE you are not fooling anyone by making up new log ins or do you think we are all idiots??--Smoggy80 14:01, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
Owen, two things you did are not helpful to your cause: pretending to be another user in this discussion and, less seriously, screwing up Arstar's poll when posting your new section on Mitro.--BrianD 13:19, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
I was on fence about a permanent ban but after you made this fake account, Owen I think we have no choice. --Zack 16:19, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
this bureaucrat has started a vendetta against me and he blocked me becuse he disagreed with one of my articles--Owen1983 11:09, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
You think its a vendetta against you owen to disagree with your articles?? SERIOUSLY??? then you are more deluded than i thought you already were!
Mitro was not the only one to have a problem with your articles. Your page on Albion springs to mind, you remember that don't you Owen? that was when you wholescale COPIED my Cleveland article and rebranded it as yours? Most of the contributers to this Wiki have a MAJOR problem with you. Me included. The more you try and argue your case, the more you are pi**ing the rest of us off, and the more likely you are to get yourself PERMABANNED!--Smoggy80 14:07, October 9, 2010 (UTC) Smoggy80 you may not like me but plz be civil OK--Owen1983 22:42, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
I've changed the user page for Owen to remove Obsolete articles and marking the stub and proposal articles so that people can see how little Owen has contribute to DD canon--Smoggy80 14:21, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
Guys, lets permaban him now. We don't need a vote from the civilians anymore, as the TSPTF, we must smite him from the face of the wiki! Arstar 16:51, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
I agree. He's been giving us our fair share of headaches for nigh-two years now; let's just nip this in the bud now and permaban him; you know if we give him a month ban or a year ban he'll just be back in a month or a year-he's done that before and he'll do it again. Besides, we need to make an example out of him as well-if we let him stay and give him one-day bans or one-week bans, then who's to say God-forbid years down the line you have people similar to Owen; then what mess will be in?
- Owen, I've been waiting for this day for nearly a year now, as have so many other people. How about you just do us all a favour and back off so we won't even have to permaban you?
Mr.Xeight 23:59, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
I would just like to go on record that I support Zack's permaban of Owen. However I would also ask that users refrain from leaving messages on Owen's talk page. This is over now. Mitro 20:32, October 10, 2010 (UTC)
I know that you've upset a lot of people with several different bad edits, but I was reading your user page and I thought your politics are a bit extreme, but BNP??? seriously This might explain why you are disliked by so many people
Yours truly --Qrfbsca
He's not going to respond, being blocked and all. I have issues with his spelling and grammer, not his politics.HAD 21:00, October 10, 2010 (UTC)
- Guys, I just asked that people not leave anymore messages on Owen's talk page. Please don't make me set it so no one can edit the page. Mitro 21:05, October 10, 2010 (UTC)
users can post comments on my talkpage as long as there nice
but please dont revert it OK
whi is Mitro an burueaucrat
her is tow reasons why he shouldn't
- he blocks people for no reason
- on many occasions he is uncivil
i can think of a suitable replacement
A few other things
U was reading a post regarding me on the TSPTF and a number of people have problems with my block ie southwriter commander data chip1990 hamster1983 both were blocked for there opinion you running this wiki like a police state its not going to continue
There is many reasons to ban you. The only question is a year or forever. And we are all well aware that data, chip, and hamster are all you. We're not stupid.
Lordganon 05:54, October 15, 2010 (UTC)
Apart from the fact you're not meant to create sockpuppets, you could at least have had the courtesy to announce it was you using the puppets, and try to convince us rather than use made-up diseases to act as your defence! And furthermore, if you made them solely to defend yourself, what was the whole Wolfworld thing about then? Fegaxeyl 16:17, October 15, 2010 (UTC)
you aren't meant to create sock puppets but sock puppet creation is allowed and if i chose to create one to circumvent a block which I feel is unjust i can and will and BTW Wolfworld was written by me so its not plagiarism --Owen1983 16:28, October 15, 2010 (UTC)
- It is plagiarism Owen. It was written by Tony Jones, here is the original website: http://www.wolfram.demon.co.uk/ah_wolfworld.html
- Owen, you have been banned for making sockpuppets (pretending it was not you), lying and taking credit for others work. Mitro 16:34, October 15, 2010 (UTC)
it was Inspired by 'The Sixth Winter' by Douglas Orgill and John Gribben. and its licensed under creative commons so its not plagiarism your a lawyer you should no this and if i was masquerading as Brass IE Smoggy I deserve to be blocked but I didn't so unblock me --Owen1983 17:29, October 15, 2010 (UTC)
- First off you should get a lawyer, because what you said is not true. Taking someone's work from their own personal website and claiming it as your own is stealing. Second off it does not matter who you pretend to be when you make a sockpuppet, making one is a banable offense.
- Furthemore I am not going to unblock you. In fact I am going to protect this page so that only admins can edit it. I kept this page editable to you on the off chance you actually convinced someone that your ban should be lifted. Its obvious from your statements that the permanent ban on you was justified and allowing you to continue to edit this page will just be an unecessary disruption. Good bye, Owen. Mitro 17:41, October 15, 2010 (UTC)