User talk:Greghenderson2006

UTRS appeal #91741

is declined. User is not eligible to contest the community-imposed block until 2025-08-08 at the soonest. --Yamla (talk) 22:20, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

This kind of not WP:IDHT behavior is part and parcel of why the community was in favor of blocking to begin with. For the record you are not blocked from using your talk page, you just are not permitted to appeal for a year. May I suggest you just accept that and move on? Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 22:40, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

What about my User page?

I find it hard to believe that a user can be blocked just becuase of some disruptive editing. It is like throwing me in jail for a year just because I spoke out and used a few what say are unreliable sources. Greg Henderson (talk) 22:52, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

You aren't locked up, you are kicked out. The community has spoken, at length, about the issues with your edits and concluded it would be better off if you were not able to edit. This wan't my idea, I merely acted in an administrative capacity to implement the obvious consensus reflected in the ANI discussion, so I'm not going to argue the points with you but I would again suggest that the sooner you accept that you are kicked out for a year, the easier it will be to get unblocked when you are permitted to appeal. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 00:09, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

@Just Step Sideways: Is there a way I can update my user page? It has some old data that needs to be updated. It seems that even though someone is site blocked, it should not prevent them from updating their own personal user page, right? Greg Henderson (talk) 16:50, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

You can’t. Probably on a technical basis though I’m not sure. In any case having a userpage is a luxury, not a right, and “some old data needs to be updated” is an extremely trivial issue even in that context. I can, however, make the edit for you if it’s reasonably simple. Dronebogus (talk) 08:45, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Greghenderson2006, I'm going to take the risk of causing you further hurt by backing up the admin here. You had ample opportunity at AN/I to argue your case. While "anyone can edit" is an admirable general principle, it doesn't mean anyone has a right to do anything they want to on the site. Articles do get deleted (including some that were accepted at AfC), and admins do block people from editing in order to protect the encyclopedia. It is after all a privately owned website. Your idea of notability is, I'm sorry to say, at variance with English Wikipedia's; I'm sorry to say that even though I have an inclusionist userbox on my user page and have worked hard to save a number of articles, what I've seen of your recent articles that you listed at AN/I demonstrated to me that you set the bar for notability way too low. (I also found the articles not very well written, but that's a common reaction of mine. I did what I could to improve Santa Clara Verein, which attracted my attention because of my interest in the turner movement and because the article gave the impression in places, including the intro, that the building still existed.) You wrote that you have your own website and have published books. I sincerely suggest you focus on the website and on writing more books. Writing for a specifically interested readership is in many ways more rewarding than Wikipedia, especially if your interest is in documenting all the major buildings of smaller towns and cities, and people of only local notability. Wikipedia notability just doesn't stretch that far, I'm afraid. Yngvadottir (talk) 01:19, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for comments. I wrote the article Santa Clara Verein because it was on the U.S. National Register of Historic Places. A safer bet than some of my many Carmel-by-the-Sea, California articles. The lessons I've learned is don't speak out too much, don't write about your local area of interest, and don't write about family members. Yes, I set the Notability bar lower because I think certain people and places need recognition, e.g. photographer Draft:Lewis Josselyn or Draft:Casa del Oro. I will continue my writing efforts on Simple Wikipedia and of course, my books, and website Hendersonfamilytree.com. Thanks again for your help with Santa Clara Verein! Greg Henderson (talk) 14:44, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

UTRS appeal #92106

is declined. User is warned further abuse may result in UTRS access being yanked, too. --Yamla (talk) 22:49, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Anton C. Heidrick

Hello, Greghenderson2006. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Anton C. Heidrick".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:12, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Mary L. Hamlin

Hello, Greghenderson2006. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Mary L. Hamlin, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 18:10, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Mary L. Hamlin

Hello, Greghenderson2006. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Mary L. Hamlin".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:16, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

June 2025

Hello, Greghenderson2006, welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. Your editing pattern indicates that you may be using multiple accounts or coordinating editing with people outside Wikipedia, such as Marchiart (talk · contribs). Our policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow this, and users who misuse multiple accounts may be blocked from editing. If you operate multiple accounts directly or with the help of another person, please disclose these connections. It seems that there is either sock or meat puppetry occurring or ongoing undisclosed paid editing during your block. The user space draft User:Greghenderson2006/sandbox4 was copied from the your user space, and moved into article space by a "new" account (which obviously is not new), User:Marchiart, thus creating the article: David J. Marchi. There is other strong evidence as well which I will not go into here. Pinging @ @Graywalls:, @Star Mississippi:, @Beeblebrox:. Netherzone (talk) 18:08, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

The account hasn't edited in six months @Netherzone, so I'm not going to block but flagging too for @Yamla as the re-set date on any c-ban should be at least November 2025 now. Thanks for flagging the article which I'll go look at. I don't think there's an SPI here but maybe there needs to be Star Mississippi 18:20, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

@Star Mississippi, Yes, I know it has been dormant for months, and seemed to be here just to move the article into mainspace (completing the transaction). I will email you the evidence because BEANS. Netherzone (talk) 18:22, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

Marchiart (talk · contribs) has now disclosed on his talk page that he paid Greghenderson2006 to create this article. (See User talk:Marchiart#June 2025.) Yet Mr. Henderson never disclosed that this was the case, although there were many conversations and inquiries on various talk pages and noticeboards with the editor about their undisclosed paid editing. Would this qualify as a G5, or for resetting the date on the C-ban block as suggested by @Star Mississippi:? It saddens me that the artist is caught up in the mess. Netherzone (talk) 19:46, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for helping me out here. I too want to make sure there is compliance on every level Marchiart (talk) 20:16, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Thank you for your transparency. Can you clarify if Greg assisted you with the publication of the article in November 2024, or did you do that on your own initiative? Curbon7 (talk) 20:20, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

Thank you @Marchiart for your disclosures.

@Netherzone my personal opinion is no to the G5 as it seems unkind to punish the artist for Henderson's duplicity, but yes to the CB extension. Star Mississippi 20:42, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

@Star Mississippi, Marchiart has now disclosed on their talk page that Greg did everything for me as far as my page is concerned, including making it live as he referred it. See User talk:Marchiart#June 2025. Since it was Greg who made it live when he had already been blocked for months and was continuing to engage in UPE in a clandestine manner while blocked, it seems like either the clock should be reset on the community block/ban or possibly more due to confirmed ongoing UPE while blocked. Netherzone (talk) 12:52, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

I agree, and that will come up when he requests an unblock in August. He should not be eligible until at least November if not now.

I'm not super familiar with CU data @Netherzone but since the Marchiart account is active again it may pick up other Henderson sleepers, but it also carries risk of block for David Marchi, which I wouldn't want to see happen since he's upfront. Star Mississippi 13:04, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

I agree that the artist is sadly caught up in this mess and has been honest in the discussion on his talk page and wants to cooperate and comply with P&G. However, Greg is now bombarding Marchiart with emails off-wiki which the artist finds to be very stressful. [1] I am getting bombarded by emails from Greg. Marchi also states that I would also like to let Greg know that I do not want to be in the middle of his issues with Wikipedia and there's no reason for him to contact me. I thought that @Beeblebrox removed email access in August 2024. [2]

Regarding sleepers, I think I may have found one, but as @Star Mississippi says, opening an SPI could run the risk of the artist getting blocked too which could cause even more stress for him. Any advise on whether a report should be opened on the possible sleeper? The last time it was active was April of this year. Netherzone (talk) 12:06, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

@Netherzone, Henderson's email is indeed revoked but it's possible he found the artist's email offline. I'd suggest the artist use his email's block function. I think it's probably worth the filing given you know it was recently active. I'd note in the filing (and tag me, I'll weigh in too if you do) that the artist is collateral damage. No CU appears online but if you see one when you are, ping them? I'm about to head offine again for the day Star Mississippi 12:47, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

His email is revoked here but not at other projects like Commons and Marchiart did make an edit there. S0091 (talk) 14:27, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

@Netherzone:, I mean, if the artist is a paying client of Greg, it's assumed they have traditional contact infos (phone, email address, and such). Graywalls (talk) 16:08, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

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.

~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:03, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

@ToBeFree, could you also check user this account: User:Historyjunkie2024, I have behavioral evidence that indicates it's another account used by this editor. I don't want to say what that evidence is in this public forum, because BEANS, but if you like, I'll email the details to you. Just let me know. Thank you in advance. Netherzone (talk) 22:27, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

Netherzone, this is purely about Historyjunkie2024. If you hadn't seen their block yet, good catch! :) ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:31, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

@Netherzone and ToBeFree:

On Wiki evidence anchors down the evidence even stronger by the fact they happened to have the exact same version of the iPhone as per EXIF.

• https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:New_Bullards_Bar_Dam_with_boats.jpg
• https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Golden_Bough_Playhouse_auditorium.jpg

Graywalls (talk) 02:55, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for sharing this with the sockpuppeteer. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 14:17, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

@ToBeFree I'll be careful in the future. I just read WP:BEANS. I'm used to just discussing everything short of prohibited personally identifying information.. Graywalls (talk) 20:59, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

It's all good and not forbidden. BEANS isn't policy nor guideline. No worries. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:02, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

@ToBeFree, wouldn't that message be construed by Greg as an invitation to submit an appeal? Let's hope not. He wasn't allowed to appeal in any form until August 25 2025.. and with the latest incident, that should be extended to June 2026. Graywalls (talk) 03:09, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

It shouldn't be. There are two blocks on the account now and the notification is about a checkuser-appeal-only block having been added to the existing one. The block log looks a bit strange because I used Twinkle and it replaced the original block first, but the account is now double blocked. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 09:18, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

Given he just recreated Sidewalk Clock, 783 Fifth Avenue at simple:Sidewalk Clock at 783 Fifth Avenue, he's pretty much admitted Historyjunkie2024 is him so a successful appeal for socking is extremely unlikely. S0091 (talk) 14:37, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for flagging @S0091

I know folks were hesitant to block him on other projects the last time this came up @Netherzone. I wonder if @M7 or @Lee Vilenski have any thoughts to add given the new information. TL:DR - Henderson has continued his UPE and is now socking since his August 2024 ban here: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1163#Topic_Ban_or_Site_Block,_Greghenderson2006. It was immediately on Commons and now seems to have migrated back to Simple. Star Mississippi 14:55, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

@Star Mississippi. I am probably the least active sysop on simple wiki, and the last one (re)elected. If you'd like to contact any of the CUs or leave a message on ANI it may be rather useful. Thanks, have a nice day. --M/ (talk) 16:01, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, @M7

reported at Simple wiki. Star Mississippi 02:01, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

And now, Greg has made a frivolous unblock request over at User talk:Historyjunkie2024. I suggest that talk page and email access for that account be revoked as well. ~SG5536B 16:06, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

Actually he's not requesting to be unblocked by disputing the article deletions. ??? I have no words. S0091 (talk) 16:13, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

@SG5536B and ToBeFree:, can the puppeteer's user page be blanked too under the idea expressed in WP:DENY? Seems like a good idea. Graywalls (talk) 20:12, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi Graywalls, the amount of explicit "DENY" requests and messages I've seen in the last 24 hours indicates that people are misunderstanding something about actually denying attention. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:23, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

Graywalls, but to actually answer your question: I'm fine with either. From my personal side, anyone could blank it. I considered doing so because the amount of personal details together with a photo below a sockpuppeteer pillory notice is close to being a BLP violation, and the user can't edit it anymore. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:04, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

Thinking about it again, I now did so. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:06, 12 June 2025 (UTC)