Promotional Attack (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Promotional Attack (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 65: | Line 65: | ||
==Sockpuppet investigation== |
==Sockpuppet investigation== |
||
{{Ivmbox |
{{Ivmbox |
||
|Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into [[Wikipedia:Sock puppetry|sockpuppetry]] by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/ |
|Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into [[Wikipedia:Sock puppetry|sockpuppetry]] by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/WordSeventeen]], where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SPI/Guidance#Defending yourself against claims|the guide to responding to investigations]], and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you ''have'' been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.{{#if:yes| [[User:Promotional Attack|Promotional Attack]] ([[User talk:Promotional Attack|talk]]) 22:30, 17 February 2016 (UTC)}} |
||
|[[File:Puppeter template.svg|40px|center|link=|alt=]] |
|[[File:Puppeter template.svg|40px|center|link=|alt=]] |
||
}} |
}} |
Revision as of 22:30, 17 February 2016
![Aialik glacier panorama-image by Ionare Sevi](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9d/Aialik_glacier_pano_2.jpg/480px-Aialik_glacier_pano_2.jpg)
Please comment on Talk:Johann Sebastian Bach
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Johann Sebastian Bach. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Welcome!
Hello, Jilllyjo, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Billy the Kid. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
- Introduction and Getting started
- Contributing to Wikipedia
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page and How to develop articles
- How to create your first article
- Simplified Manual of Style
You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or , and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Hallward's Ghost (Kevin) (My talkpage) 16:42, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
A request
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hi Jilly, I don't know what the situation is with you and Winkelvi, but please don't seek out interactions with him. There was no need for this or to revert when he removed it (which meant he had seen it). It's best just to get on with your own work. SarahSV (talk) 23:52, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you for the note. I believe though that you may be be mistaken , or perhaps have been misinformed, not sure which.
I did not "revert when he removed it" any item on the talk page of winkelvi. As you say that would not be proper to revert on another users talk page. Please look that over again if you get a chance. As far as seeking out interactions with him I am not. I attempted to talk with him about working together on the Billy the Kid article. That is all. Now since he has been showing bad faith today against me and others on wikipedia today I warned him and he is trying to accuse me of harassment! That is totally ridiculous. Winkelvi has been acting predjudicially toward me just because I have not made a userpage yet. deja vu I am getting back to my work. Jilllyjo (talk) 00:09, 13 February 2016 (UTC).
- You are wrong Ches Winkelvi is somehow under the impression that I reverted something on his talk page after he removed it. This whole thing has been blown out of proportion. Even though I know you are biased toward winkelvi please go to his talk page andd find a diff where I reverted anything there. I did not, but if you can show me a diff where I reverted there I will say I am mistaken. The note SV left above, she was mistake about me reverting his removal of the bad faith warning I left there. As I said at Svès page winkelvi is harassing me. He is at articles I edit yes. He is treating me with predudice against me and keeps using his word derogatorily toward me (red-linked). like he thinks I have no worth or something. He make baseless allegations at SV page that I was a sockP with no proof or evidence. that is a personal attack no? Leaving two warnings on his page is not harrassment. Plus I left a note inviting him to work together on the btk article. He just reverted that with a snarky note.
Winkelvi has been bothering me since I started here just because I have been edit the btk article and other old west articles which are my favorite. Please get him to leave me alone and stop harassing me. I have kept track of the times and pages where he has been bothering me and I will take further action if necessary.
But please Ches you find the diff where I reverted anything on his talk page. He is wrong about that and has blown this all out of proportion. Ask him to stop all his disruption and harassment of me.It is a horrendous way to treat a new editor! signed JillyJo Jilllyjo (talk) 10:02, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
(edit conflict) *1. WV has been editing BTK for a while now - in fact, he nominated it for GA status. You, however, have just appeared on that article, and you aren't making any constructive edits at all, besides changing wording that was fine in the first place. The only reason he edits the articles that you edit is because you've been following him around to those articles.
- 2. He has every right to think you're a sock. You have no user page, you have a suspicious and somewhat strange bias towards Maunus - in fact, now might be a good time to mention that your grammar and spelling was of good standard on Maunus' talk page, and that response you left just now is of poor grammar? Strange. Also, as I mentioned before, you have randomly appeared on this article - one which Maunus has a history of editing. You have very few edits, and yet you know about GA reviews and wanted the BTK GA review to be declined. Also strange. It is clear that you are not new to Wikipedia, and if I were you, I'd declare your alternate accounts. --Ches (talk) 10:13, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
- wow more casting of aspersions with no proof or evidence. More accusation of being a sock with no proof, evidence, or diffs. Show a diff where I said I wanted the GA of btk to be declined? That is a lie!
"The only reason he edits the articles that you edit is because you've been following him around to those articles." This comment shows bad faith by you toward me. Consider yourself warned. And Maunus? So is he a sock too? wow you have gone way too far now. Jilllyjo (talk) 10:21, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
- I don't highly suspect Maunus. I just find it suspicious that several R/L editors without user pages and very few edits seem to be editing BTK and stating that the GA review shouldn't go on, or are just trying to sabotage it. Shootseven comes to mind. --Ches (talk) 10:24, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
- I never said I wanted btk to fail GA. Some other editors did yes. Do not group me in with anyone and say I did that. You were wrong. Please get your facts straight before typing on my talk page. I have made quite a few edits there correcting poor wording, fixing mistakes, and copyedited problems areas, and I have said several times that I want to have the btk article to pass GA. Thanks! Jilllyjo (talk) 10:32, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
- I don't highly suspect Maunus. I just find it suspicious that several R/L editors without user pages and very few edits seem to be editing BTK and stating that the GA review shouldn't go on, or are just trying to sabotage it. Shootseven comes to mind. --Ches (talk) 10:24, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
- Ches, WV has banned half of the editors here from their talk page and then goes around posting nasty untrue stuff about them. Save your breath defending him - it makes you look bad. I get you are trying to mentor him, but please don't add to his drama. Yes I was asked to look at this, so what? Legacypac (talk) 14:54, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Hillary Clinton email controversy
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Hillary Clinton email controversy.
A kitten for you!
too close to the camera :P
Ronniejbaroi (talk) 20:21, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
Copy-edit request
Hi can you please copyedit my article Assassination of Ali. Its up for DYK review, where the reviewer has asked it to be copyedited. RRD13 দেবজ্যোতি (talk) 08:52, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
- Sure. I will take a look at it now. I will do a thorough job, so please give me 24 to 36 hours. Thanks for asking me. I will be glad to do the copyedit. Jilllyjo (talk) 09:09, 17 February 2016 (UTC
- at footnote #4 do you know the year to 28 January? Jilllyjo (talk) 09:17, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
- Inserted the info. RRD13 দেবজ্যোতি (talk) 16:18, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
- at footnote #4 do you know the year to 28 January? Jilllyjo (talk) 09:17, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
Sockpuppet investigation
![](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/fd/Puppeter_template.svg/40px-Puppeter_template.svg.png)
Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/WordSeventeen, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community. Promotional Attack (talk) 22:30, 17 February 2016 (UTC)