User talk:Opcouk

Your submission at Articles for creation: User:Opcouk/sandbox (March 6)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time.
Please read the comments left by the reviewer on your submission. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Opcouk/sandbox.
To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the reviewer's talk page.

Thank you for your
contributions to Wikipedia!

Please remember to link to the submission!

You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 13:12, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Pentax into Pentax 6×7. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. DanCherek (talk) 13:13, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

What are you going on about?

I simply do not understand why you want to conceal the fact that Mamiya and Pentax brands have been revived and there is a repair and service centre in the UK for owners worldwide.

I innocently copy/pasted some useful info from other articles and put the attribution at the bottom but did not use words "copied from"

Why could you not simply make this correction?

I have no intention to deprive any person of their copyright in articles they have written. But when it comes to information and data about a brand then editors of Wiki should wind their necks in. I have direct and authorised data and information from brands which proves that information in Wiki articles is incorrect, out of date and misleading to the public. I also happen to be a expert on Pentax and Mamiya 6x7cm cameras with 42 years experience in medium format film photography.

Kindly put bad the insertions I made and remove the web link to the brand repair centre if this is considered "advertising" or "promotion". Opcouk (talk) 08:09, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reversion of medium format camera edits

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. A number of your edits to medium format camera topics (specifically, on Mamiya, Mamiya RB67, Mamiya RZ67, and Pentax 6x7) appear to be WP:CONFLICT, due to their clear focus on a recent trademark transfer, and linking the repair website of the new trademark holder while wiping a reference of a previous repair website listed. I've reverted those, but given the breadth of the content reverted I will stay WP:1RR - if you want to revert them back, go for it and I'd love to talk some more here.

Some of the information you've added about accessories and different setup options to the Mamiya RB67 and Mamiya RZ67 was definitely helpful and constructive, but unsourced. I tried to source some of it, and was able to somewhat for those above. I'm less familiar with resources available for the Pentax 6×7, so it would be awesome if you could reincorporate some of those with sources attributed.

Thank you! Eyesinthefire (talk) 19:01, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Who are you

I am directly in touch with the brand owner and authorised by the brand owner

You do not have higher authority than the brand or the brand onwer Opcouk (talk) 19:11, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a volunteer editor of Wikipedia and have the Mamiya RB67 on my watchlist as it's a camera I enjoy using. As mentioned above (and supported by your response), my view is that the edits you have made on these pages are in violation of Wikipedia's conflict of interest policy, and so I've reverted them. If you'd like to have the pages updated to include information on the trademark update, it would be great if you could request the changes to be made on each article's talk pages.

Thanks! Eyesinthefire (talk) 19:26, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are an editor

You are not the brand. You are not the brand owner. You are not the expert on the brand.

I am offcially authorised by the trade mark and copyright owner.

The brand want the information on Wiki corrected

I made those corrections.

The web url is not a violation when it is the brand appointed and authorised Opcouk (talk) 19:31, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

you have to take the RB67 to the brand that made it to repair and service it

But you are silencing that brand

You have one hell of a cheek my friend Opcouk (talk) 19:32, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

I tried to make the request as you advised

Please tell me how Opcouk (talk) 13:08, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Pentax 67 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Pentax 67 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pentax 67 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:03, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Asahi Optical for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Asahi Optical is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Asahi Optical until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:22, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 2023

Hello, I'm Wasell. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Mamiya RB67 have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. —Wasell^(T) 🌻🇺🇦 16:27, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Trade mark is the copyright of the holder and public information. Opcouk (talk) 16:47, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

Drmies (talk) 17:03, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I dont understand what you are going about. Please email me full disclosure of the information you are using in you decision making process Opcouk (talk) 17:36, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So here's the thing: you are also User talk:Mamiya Optical, an account that was blocked for a username violation and promotional edits. You proposed another username, but didn't address the promotional part, and here you are, with another account doing the same thing. On top of that, you are disruptive: your edits violate formatting guidelines and seem to fetishize something about the brand name at the expense of encyclopedic content. We can't have that. Drmies (talk) 17:30, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are badly mistaken. Please email me full disclosure of the information you are using to make wild allegation to block me. Opcouk (talk) 17:35, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 2023

Your account has been indefinitely blocked from editing because of the following problems: the account has been used for advertising or promotion, which is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia, and your username indicates that the account represents a business, organisation, group, or web site, which is against the username policy.

You may request a change of username and unblock if you intend to make useful contributions instead of promoting your business or organization. To do this, first search Special:CentralAuth for available usernames that comply with the username policy. Once you have found an acceptable username, post the text {{unblock-spamun|Your proposed new username|Your reason here}} at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with your new username and replace the text "Your reason here" with your reasons to be unblocked. In your reasons, you must:

Disclose any compensation you may receive for your contributions in accordance with the paid-contribution disclosure requirement.
Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the kind of edits for which you were blocked.
Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked.

Appeals: If, after reviewing the guide to appealing blocks, you believe this block was made in error, you may appeal it by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your reason here" with the reasons you believe the block was an error, and publish the page.

Cullen328 (talk) 17:04, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cullen328, please note that I dropped a CU block here right after your block--but I also included the same things you blocked for. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 17:32, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Drmies, I noticed that. Thanks. Cullen328 (talk) 17:36, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Which part are you referring to. Why did you not make the correction or ask me to make the correction.

Trade mark owner of "Mamiya RB67" is the copyright owner. This is public information Opcouk (talk) 17:25, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock my account

This user's request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without a good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

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

Requested username:

Your proposed new username (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Request reason:

There is no issue with my username for past 9 years. I have no intention whatsoever to breach T&C of Wiki. I want to help update information on Wiki

Insertion of Trade Mark owner is copyright of the owner and public information. Wiki has no legal reason to conceal the information about Trade Marks.

I am keen to share that Mamiya, Mamiya RB67 and Mamiya RZ67 are fully revived. How is this promotion or advertising.?

Decline reason:

Apart from that last part (see here for a common answer to that question), you're being as obstinate as you were at your other account, enough to reinforce that "does not play well with others" vibe, as if your response to my decline of your request there wasn't already way more than enough to do that. — Daniel Case (talk) 06:25, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Opcouk (talk) 17:33, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]