User talk:Picard's Facepalm

Hello, I am Sam. Welcome to Meta. This is a message telling you about your negative engagements in Wikipedia.

First of all, on Jacobchoi20’s talk page, he made a formal message to you to look through everything they had done. However, you mistook it for a legal threat, which is not making any sense at all.

Then, by your response to the underlying IP 220.255.180.65, you made a legal threat: "If there were a WP article for "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't force it to drink" it would have your photo at the top of the infobox." I am truly sorry, but having someone’s photos on Wikipedia without their permission is against Wikipedia’s confidentiality policy. You did not have permission granted for the creation of the page. And by the change of IPs to 220.255.188.227, while he made a message there, he repeated it and asked you if you felt good after this.

Please do not repeat "Editing Wikipedia is not your job. If your CEO asks you to do it, perhaps it be a conflict of interest? See WP:COI." It is not to be continuous, and that just wasted your time on engaging with other users.

You literally said, " Not sure what you are referring to about "your creations" - perhaps your company is trying to make aircraft? If so - I wish you luck and success." By taking part of an AfD for the S100 aircraft they worked hard on creating, you are not doing so.

To answer your question "which aerospace company", you have written on your user page on Wikipedia. It is meant to be called Sihae Aircraft Manufacturing Co., Ltd. or its shortened form SAMCO only.

Furthermore, I live in one of the two residential towers near their company, and my sister does not work there, neither do I. Their CEO had told me that he wants to write "The Journal of Aviation", and he would like to add this severe case to the ends of all three parts.

Thank you for your time. SAMCOcreator1655 (talk) 03:32, 1 September 2024 (UTC) Reply

Not sure why I am being tagged in this issue yet again, after so many months that it has passed - but I will address this in response only once, and then I will wash my hands of it yet again - but for the absolute final time. Please ensure that you understand that fact and do not pull me into this any more.

First - I did not require a welcome to Meta. I was not a part of Meta or engaged on Meta or even registered on Meta until you mentioned me and that tagging carried over elsewhere. Not sure what the point is at all of bringing up this issue here - it was exhaustively discussed on WP Proper, and the multiple accounts of the offending user have been permanently blocked. There is absolutely zero need to move and re-open the can of worms here.

Second - I did not mistake anything for a legal threat. Quoting him, "Please note that this involved my CEO, too. They wanted to state that this was unappreciative to the whole company and it was extremely disrespectful towards us. This should stop now. I hope this matter is looked into and someone takes necessary action.". After which I clearly stated that it stopped short of a legal threat. Meaning - it went right up to the line of becoming one, especially when taken in the totality of the other comments in the other threads (one of which DID have a direct, legal threat in it).

My response to 220.255.180.65 is by absolutely no measure anything close to that of "legal threat". How the hell do you come up with that kind of a flagrantly wild extrapolation? One would need to have some serious reading comprehension issues to come to the end of that being a legal threat when in reality it was merely an analogy or an idiom, and it was a purely hypothetical one, at that - utilizing the key word of "if" in my statement that you refer to. That is a very important word in this cotnext. I have linked "analogy" above here for your convenience so you can make sure you understand the context of what you are speaking about the next time you try to use it against them. And I also stand by my statement - IF indeed there were a WP page for you can lead a horse to water but you cannot force it drink - it would have [their] photo at the top of the infobox". The interactions with Jacobchoi and their endless myriad of block-evading accounts along with their outright refusal to read, understand and follow long-established WP policies and procedures is a textbook example of the horse not drinking the water which they were lead to. I exhaustively explained this on 220.255.188.227's talk page. Again - this was nothing more than a hypothetical analogy to drive and drive the point home in the user's brain. I see it has worked even less for you than it has for them. That's not on me. Make sure you understand what a hypothetical analogy is before you ever think to throw daggers at me again. That kind of misgiving on your part will be tolerated once - and only once. Clear?

Additionally, I do in fact have permission to create pages on WP. I have created pages and I will continue to create more... and maybe it is indeed time for one with regards to "leading a horse to water". I might also add that just about every single person who has their photo in an article on WP has not given their permission for it to be on WP. No permission is necessary nor required if the person who actually captured the photo grants permission for it to be used. There is absolutely no such policy like what you claim on WP. If you truly believe otherwise, then I encourage you to go over to WP Commons and engage in such ludicrous discussion with the userbase there. Lastly - if a user has any expectation of confidentiality - it would probably be in their best interest not to actually use their real and given name as their username on WP. Just sayin'.

I am going to repeat my references to WP:COI because it is WP policy and it absolutely applies to this scenario. It is in fact yet another textbook example as to why that policy exists in the first place. Citing WP policy is not a waste of time - it is ensuring the users are given ample opportunity to make sure they understand and follow WP policy. If they don't - then they are the only one who are wasting time as their edits will likely be reverted and their access will likely be revoked so all of their efforts will have been for nothing. That is yet another textbook example of wasted time. the COI policy is there to be read - not ignored by users who are creating content based upon such scenarios, and no - their job is not to edit WP. Period. These statements and references to WP policy will in fact continue for as long as the block-evading user demonstrates it is necessary to do so.

Your statement of "my not wishing luck and success" in their efforts in potentially creating an aircraft simply because I was part of an AfD to remove the article about it is not only disingenuous - but is also an outright lie on your part. Understand clearly: YOU do not get to tell me how I feel or what I think. Only one person on this earth does - and that is me. Got it? If I say I wish them luck and success it is because I do, and I am very genuine in every single word I speak or type in my life.

That being said - clearly both you and they need to come to grips with the reality the success of any product on this planet does not hinge on the creation or existence of a Wikipedia article.

Additionally - I don't care where you live, and it does not matter at all in any of the context of what has happened here. Same goes with regards to where you work, or where your sister works. Nobody knows either of you, nobody cares where either of you live, and nobody cares where either of you work. Absolutely none of that matter with regards to your post here, my response here, or what has transpired on WP with Jacobchoi's multiple accounts and AnonIPs, or even anything to do with regards to this supposed aero company. What was your actual point in bringing any of that up?

If the CEO wants to get into aero journalism - that's their prerogative. That has nothing to do with any of this. If he wants to write about The Journal (or Journey) of Aviation - the first thing that he needs to understand is that Wikipedia has nothing to do with Aviation or Journalism. If the CEO cannot understand at least that much - then he has no business in either field. As it seems he has some sort of influence over you and your contribution here - I will state the obvious: Between that influence, your connection to the CEO and your remarks of where you live and the involvement of your sister (huh?) - it is most likely the case that this is just yet another multiple account of Jacobchoi20, and it is likely to reveal that it too is being used over on WP to evade blocks - or at the very least is yet another, very clear example of WP:COI. If indeed that is the case - then yes, your account too will be put on notice for said COI. Again - it is on you to understand what that is and why that is bad. It is not on me to not keep reminding you of it until you understand it.

To put a bow on this - do not bother to respond to this. Do not mention me further. Do not comment on my talk pages. Do not prolong what is a closed discussion & situation on WP Proper over to here. Doing so will only result your demonstrating yet another analogy - that of beating a dead horse. Be quiet, move along and leave me alone. -- Picard's Facepalm (talk) 19:44, 3 September 2024 (UTC) Reply

Imagine that - I was right. You are a sock of AirbusA350500, which also has a sock named Jacobchoi20. What a surprise... How could I have possibly guessed that? It's really not smart of you to refer to yourself in the third person like you did in this post of yours. So let me be real clear - knock it off and back off, or you're gonna find your accounts here on Meta sanctioned, too. Reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/AirbusA350500/Archive Picard's Facepalm (talk) 19:50, 3 September 2024 (UTC) Reply

Sure, and it is just whatever happens to get someone to make legal threats, and it is definitely you who tried to taunt my little brother, and I did not appreciate that. Please disengage with the further arguments. GyecheonSageori (talk) 14:04, 4 September 2024 (UTC) Reply