User talk:Claudio di Roma

Welcome!

Hello, Claudio di Roma, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Below are some pages you might find helpful. For a user-friendly interactive help forum see the Wikipedia Teahouse.

Introduction
The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
How to write a great article
Simplified Manual of Style
Your first article
Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! HiLo48 (talk) 01:41, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions for you, after my reversal

Since I changed your edits a couple of times, let me give you some suggestions to give your best on wikipedia. When editing and giving arguments, don't be "exclusive" when it comes to status or power or other things that would make you incur in WP:Peacock ("the most powerful", "the most beautiful" etc.). That kind of stuff (usually) should get removed, unless we are talking about things that can be measured. You can be exclusive when it comes to peculiar things that are specific to one country's history or culture.

Let me give some examples, when you say "Spain is not a cultural superpower, Italy is", that is not an effective argument because Italy being a cultural superpower does not in itself exclude that Spain is a cultural superpower (i've noticed you also made a point on the lack of sources for that claim, and I will look into that). On the other hand, when you say "Spain was a superpower in the age of discovery like Portugal, England, France etc" that is a great argument because it's not based on exclusivity and no one can counter it in good faith as it does not give anyone the status of "the one" or "the most" (altough the current consensus is to not use the concept of superpower for the pre-20th century period). You can be exclusive, for example, when you say that the Romans came from Italy and were Italic (or, to put it even better, that Italy was the epicentre/homeland of the Romans and of the Latin and Catholic civilizations) because that birthplace-ness and centrality is a peculiar thing of Italy's history and geography (like Spanish empire for Spain or Portuguese empire for Portugal etc. etc.)...but you cannot say that Italy is currently the only Latin country, cause being Latin is a purely linguistic definition and all countries speaking Latin languages in Europe and the Americas are Latin and Italy is a part (albeit the original part) of this Latin world, but not the only part. Also don't be exclusive when it comes to parts of history who belong to more than one country in different ways and to different degrees (we go from Italians working for another country like Columbus or person of nationality X but of Italian origins, like Napoleon etc. etc.). By being exclusive in peculiar claims (or things that can be measured) and being inclusive for things that can be claimed by multiple countries you'll avoid clashes with good-faith users.

Finally, beware of the socks of the blocked User:James Oredan cause he is a Spanish user who often edits these kind of pages and targets Italian users. He is the kind of users who pushes for this exclusiveness stuff, like deleting references that Columbus was Italian or saying that the Spanish empire was the most awesome of all time. Or that kind of stuff that should be removed. Keep your eyes open if you see something wrong to be reported.

Wish you good work on wikipedia. Barjimoa (talk) 12:41, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

August 2024

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sockpuppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. Bbb23 (talk) 15:19, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

It is my understanding that my account has been blocked by you, Bbb23, for allegedly being a sockpuppet of a user from Spain (or a Spaniard in Belgium) who had the user name James Oredan and his sockpuppet user names Venezia Fruilo and TechnicianGB. The Wikipedia user Barjimoa messaged me yesterday and warned me about that particular user. I want you to know I never had the user names James Oredan, Venezia Fruilo and TechnicianGB. What you've done by blocking my account under false pretenses and making other Wikipedia users believe I'm James Oredon, Venezia Fruilo and TechnicianGB is most devious. Simply put, I'm not that user. But, I'll bet you already knew that because you can see that his IP address and mine are not the same and we live in different countries. The first time I visited Wikipedia's Spain article and wrote on its Talk page was 6 August, 2024. Now, I'm not asking you for a public apology. The only way for you to correct your fault would be to unblock my account immediately. If not, I'll find a way to get you sorted out here.Claudio di Roma (talk) 18:37, 7 August 2024 (UTC) Claudio di Roma (talk) 19:33, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I fixed your request for proper display- your initial statement should replace the words "your reason here". Admins cannot see IP addresses. This statement boils down to "it's not me" but every sock puppet says that, since that is the whole point. If you are not a sock, you will need to explain why it might appear that you are. If you wish to negotiate with Bbb23, (and if they wish to negotiate back) you don't need to make an unblock request, as unblock requests are to ask for a third party to review the matter. 331dot (talk) 07:51, 8 August 2024 (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.

21:08, 8 August 2024 (UTC)Claudio di Roma (talk)== A lot of users have been accused of being of being socks of James Oredan ==

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).

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

Request reason:

331dot, If you check Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/James Oredan in "Comments by other users", you'll see a multitude of users have been accused of being James Oredan and his socks. Evidently, James Oredan has been creating vandalism on the Spanish Wikipedia, too. I don't even speak Spanish. The first time I heard of James Oredan was in the "Suggestions for you, after my reversal" message (above) that I received from user:Barjimoa yesterday. He advised me to beware of James Oredan and told me that James Oredan was a Spanish user. If Wikipedia is going to accuse me of being James Oredan and his socks, it should provide proof, not just an accusation or suspicion. The mentality of Wikipedia seems to be like a Puritan witch hunt; a mob mentality that doesn't have any real proof, just suspicions for condemnations. I've been told above that if I am not a sock, I'll need to explain why it might appear that I am. I have no idea why user:Bbb23 accused me and blocked me unceremoniously. He never sent me any messages indicating he thought I might have been that sock. I'm in the dark about his reason. I feel if he thought I was a sock, he needs to be the one to tell me why. I did nothing wrong on the Spain page. I pointed out that the citations saying Spain is a cultural superpower were not valid. Everyone agreed. Those citations are now failed verifications. I'm not the one who changed the status of those citations. You must admit, from what user:Barjimoa told me in his "Suggestion to you, after my reversal" message (above), the user I'm accused of being a sockpuppet of and I are polar opposites. According to user:Barjimoa, James Oredan is a Spanish person who is anti-Italy and deletes references that Columbus was Italian and says things like the Spanish Empire was the most awesome. If I were James Oredan, why would I suddenly be anti-Spain and point out the now failed verifications which claimed Spain is a cultural superpower? It just doesn't make sense, does it? I'm calling to be unblocked. Claudio di Roma (talk) 10:05, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Given your most recent rant I've revoked your talk page access and am declining this appeal. While some leeway is given to vent frustration while blocked, your edits go far beyond what is acceptable on this project. WP:UTRS is available for appeals. Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:52, 8 August 2024 (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 fixed your request so it is properly formatted. My last review puts an end to my involvement with this matter, someone else will review your request. 331dot (talk) 11:30, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

Wikipedia Claudio di Roma (talk) 16:17, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This is not an appeal. Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:13, 8 August 2024 (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.

Well, how long does it take for a Wikipedian to unblock someone? The Wikepedian who blocked me, Bbb23, did it out of spite. He did no research and has no results attesting to me being user:James Oredan. Moreover, he didn't give any warnings. He simply didn't like what I said on the Talk page. So, he tried loading off all of James Oredan's stuff on me to be vindictive. I'm not having the blame for what James Oredan and his sockpuppets did placed at my doorstep. This James Oredan stuff was ongoing way before I first spoke on the Spain Talk page two days ago. User:Barjimoa sent me a welcome two days ago acting all friendly and went out of his way to warn me about user:James Oredan from Spain and his socks. It was like an invitation from a spider to a fly. Within 24 hours, he accused me of being a sock of all of user:James Orderan's edits and comments.

I've checked user:Barjomoa's history. He's been glued to this stuff for over a decade. My first visit to Spain Talk page was just two days ago. Now, user:Barjimoa is telling everyone I'm user:James Oredan and his socks. He's accused me of having hundreds (sic!) of socks and telling people it's been found out I'm a sock and have been playing people against each other for a decade. Are you sure user:Barjimoa isn't user:James Oredan and his socks? He's had a death watch on these topics for a decade. WTF? My first visit to the Spain Talk page was only two days ago. I got a creepy welcome message from user:Barjimoa telling me to watch out for the Anti-Italian Spaniard James Orderan and his socks Venezio Friulano and TechnicianGB. Then within 24 hours he lied and blamed me for the socks' edits and Talk page comments on multitudes of articles that I had never visited. What a trap! Do you have any proof that user:Barjimoa isn't James Orderan and his socks. You have no proof that I am. Now, be fair and do something about this!

Claudio di Roma (talk) 16:17, 8 August 2024 (UTC)Claudio di Roma (talk) 21:08, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]