User talk:Monitor

You do not ever discuss Golden’s horrible actions. His rank anti-Catholic, racist, homophobic edits. His long, slanderous diatribes against anyone in his community that doesn’t support him. His rumor-mongering and accusations of sexual misconduct against his perceived enemies, his massive articles, every one of which glorifies him, his fake references, his phony self-aggrandizing claims, his lies about another editor, his retributional edits. Instead, you reference completely irrelevant events in the past as if what happened then must apply. It is clear that you have no interest in quality, only quantity. If you want this to be a place where people post musings, racist rants, advertisements for themselves, hatred towards their neighbors, and other such despicable nonsense; that may be what a wiki could be used for, but it is not what an encyclopedia is for and your title is misleading.

As you have no interest in accuracy, I will leave. No one will read your BJ articles anyhow. I only came here because I do occasional searches on text on my site for copyright violations. I would never have found this site had my copyright not been violated. I will file DMCA complaints when I see additional violations of my intellectual property rights. If he posts another lie about me, he and you will spend some time in court. (It will be a familiar experience for him. But then, after his conviction, he went on another bigoted rant claiming he was convicted because the judge was a Catholic and Catholics are murderous, evil people.) I will warn the Oak Park City Council of the articles containing accusations of sexual misconduct, corruption, and crimes and let them deal with those issues. They know him extremely well due to his past antics. You may close this account. Monitor (talk) 11:22, 12 January 2014 (CST)

The copyright issue has been resolved, not that you ever had a legitimate claim but I figured why not try to make you happy. Now you've moved the goalposts and you're asking me to discipline another user over issues that have nothing to do with you and would take me a long time to figure out. However, I don't see the Google guys getting involved every time someone posts something off-color on Blogger. I don't see Zuckerberg riding to the rescue every time someone says something uncool on Facebook. All I'm here to do is ensure a comfortable environment where people can write articles.

If it really means that much to you I suppose I can start by telling Dr. Golden there has been a complaint and maybe he should go back and reread his contributions and try to see if there is any offensive content. But it is quite clear to me that you and he have a long history and nothing I can do is going to change it. If I have to choose between guy who writes articles and guy who deletes content while inserting links to his own websites over and over, I am going to choose the article writer. It's too bad, because people do read those articles and if having those links there is that important to you, you could easily have them. Auggie (talk) 11:55, 12 January 2014 (CST)

Hilarious. A racist doesn’t know what’s racist. Blogger and Facebook don’t claim to be encyclopedias, and both quickly remove copyrighted content. (I have successfully DMCA’ed both.) And, I DID NOT INSERT LINKS TO MY SITES. I REVERTED HIS REMOVAL OF LINKS ADDED BY OTHERS AT WP. This is trivial to verify. I don’t care about links for the sake of links. I even deleted the link you put in to my book on Amazon, which gives you points in Amazon searches, because unlike the links in the BJ article, it served no purpose to inform. Links should be to additional information, not to sites telling people how wonderful you are and how evil everyone else is. Again, you clearly want lots of articles and don’t care what they say. His articles are filled with lies and accusations meant to make him look great and everyone else look incompetent, corrupt and immoral. He actually puts his name next to Thorp’s in the BJ article. Thorp is a good-hearted, philanthropic person that invented modern-day card counting, and Golden is a fraud that no one has ever heard of. It isn’t he and I that have a long history. It is he and the World that have a long history. His hatred toward anyone that doesn’t agree that he is an expert in everything is palpable. Have you actually read any of his articles? Or, do you just count the number? I know you chose quantity over quality. That’s why I will no longer edit articles. Everything I have done is reverted by Golden anyhow. He just keeps putting back the lies about himself, and you do nothing but warn someone that actually knows something about the field. What’s the point?

No need to respond. I won’t be reading this site, except for my monthly checks for copyright violations.Monitor (talk) 12:25, 12 January 2014 (CST)

Well take care. The door is always open. Auggie (talk) 21:11, 12 January 2014 (CST)

Everyone can have their content

I don't understand the problem here. If you want Les to leave your link in the blackjack article, just let him leave whatever content he has added too. Live and let live. There is no need for put-downs or for anyone to judge who is the most famous blackjack expert. Everyone gets to see their content on the interwebs. Auggie (talk) 16:46, 27 May 2016 (CDT)

IT IS NOT MY LINK. I DIDN'T ADD IT. HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO EXPLAIN THIS? This is just another of his lies. As for his "contributions", they are also outright lies. Again, no one in the BJ field has ever heard of him. He is mentioned in ZERO books. He is mentioned on ZERO BJ forums. Despite his efforts using a dozen aliases, EVERYTHING he added to Wikipedia was removed and all of his accounts banned because his contributions are all in his imagination. It is a gross insult to the scores of actual BJ experts for a complete unknown to go around the web editing his name into articles. Monitor (talk) 07:32, 29 May 2016 (CDT)

Am I mistaken in thinking it's a link to a website you run? You're been re-adding it to the article after it's been deleted. Right? Auggie (talk) 13:02, 30 May 2016 (CDT)

Augie, he copied the page from Wikipedia, added his name (which WP wouldn't let him add since he is an unknown in the field), and deleted a link to one of my highly regarded, non-commercial, no-ad, sites because he hates me. He tried to delete it at WP before he was permanently banned. This is a useful link referenced by numerous experts that I DID NOT ADD TO WIKIPEDIA. I am simply trying to undo his vandalism. He has no interest in improving an encyclopedia. He is here solely to promote himself and take vengeful actions against those that he perceives are his enemy. Monitor (talk) 13:10, 30 May 2016 (CDT)

Well it doesn't matter to me if Jimmy Wales himself added the link while the article was at Wikipedia. Once we import the article here, it's an Encyc article. Change it, and your name automatically gets added to the article history. It's not a big deal to add or remove links. Auggie (talk) 13:25, 30 May 2016 (CDT)

Then why haven't you told Les that "Everyone can have their own content?" You will note that everything he has added is about himself or mentions him (same at Wikipedia). You will note that everything he has deleted is about me (same as at Wikipedia). You should also note that he has made ultra-racist and anti-Semitic additions, has made really weird claims, like I don't live where I live, and made several direct threats against me. Very odd in an encyclopedia. Note that I have NEVER tried to add my name here. Remember, when you added an Amazon link to my book -- I removed it. I have no interest in self-aggrandizement. I am only interested in helping people.Monitor (talk) 19:51, 30 May 2016 (CDT)

I don't want to get into who is the bigger jerk. I just think it would be a really easy solution if he let's you leave the link you like, and you let him leave the lines that he likes. Everyone wins. Auggie (talk) 08:38, 31 May 2016 (CDT)

Everyone but the readers. Monitor (talk) 10:52, 31 May 2016 (CDT)

The Les Golden article has 15,000+ views and is the 12th most popular page on Encyc. For some reason Blackjack still has less than 200. Auggie (talk) 12:47, 31 May 2016 (CDT)

ROTFL. Do you actually not realize that he is the majority of those views? He has spent over a decade promoting himself with numerous aliases on numerous sites. Also, why would you think that the blackjack article would get any views other than from us as it is an extremely common term fought over by tens of thousands of sites and your position for blackjack in Google is non-existent. OTOH, Les Golden's article here is #1 in Google because he is a complete unknown and there are no other articles about him. Of course anyone searching for anyone else with a name related to Les Gold, including a popular star with a similar name, may end up here as Les Golden is a nobody. There simply are no articles about him in ANY reliable sources, period. Type "Les Golden blackjack" into Google, and you will only get articles written by him because no one in the BJ field has heard of him. Do you understand how web stats work? Monitor (talk) 19:32, 31 May 2016 (CDT)

Yes I am familiar with SEO and web stats. The point still stands, Les is creating content that is drawing tens of thousands of visitors. The blackjack article that you are fighting tooth and nail over has only a couple hundred. It all seems so stupid to me. You and Les could team up and turn Encyc into a worldwide blackjack information hub. Instead you're focusing on a few lines of content and some hurt feelings from years ago. Auggie (talk) 15:10, 1 June 2016 (CDT)

Sorry, but you are NOT familiar with SEO. The reason that his absurd article gets hits is because "Les Gold", a reality TV star with a nearly identical name who's name is Googled millions of times, is mistyped by some people. Why would anyone type in Les Golden since he is a complete unknown? Type in Les Golden, and you get this article and the phony article he put in Spanish Wikipedia. If you know SEO, look at depth on that keyword. There won't be any. As for me "teaming up" with a person who is a complete fraud, denigrates the names of actual BJ luminaries, has spent decades using aliases in Wikipedia and local newspapers comparing himself to Da Vinci, one of the most brilliant people in history -- don't be absurd. It is HE that has hurt feelings because I wouldn't help him get a book deal for a book he never wrote. Monitor (talk) 19:32, 1 June 2016 (CDT)