|This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.|
It is currently 22:04 where I am
Why revert ?
You revert on Office Open XML. The edits made were adding ISO/IEC mentioning in the lead of article (normal lead info for ALL ISO standards) and removal of WP:NPOV opinionated comments by individuals on the licensing. Wikipedia is not an opinion poll. Please stick to factual information unless that is not available. Those are normal edits for an article. Were you asked by another wikipedian to revert for him ? Are you a secondary acount of another wikipedian ?
Checkuser has confirmed that this user is Mikemikev. You had mentioned that you suspected that QuintupleTwist was the sockpuppet of a banned user and I put two and two together, after looking through the whole of his editing history (I had my suspicions in January when he first appeared). I assume he will be blocked fairly soon. Here's the report Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mikemikev. Regards, Mathsci (talk) 14:54, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
- Funny, that's exactly who I suspected he was. Merci inifiniment!--Ramdrake (talk) 17:48, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
Your userpage has been protected
Per the vandalism that has occurred on your userpage and this, I have indefinitely semi-protected your userpage. If for any reason you wish for this semi-protection to be removed, you may leave me a message on my talk page simply stating that you wish for me to remove it, and I will do so. Thanks. --(ʞɿɐʇ) ɐuɐʞsǝp 14:50, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Invitation to look at edits on IQ reference chart
I see the article IQ reference chart has been tagged for expert review since October 2012. As part of a process of drafting a revision of that article in my user sandbox, I am contacting all Wikipedians who have edited that article since early 2009 for whom I can find a user talk page.
I have read all the diffs of all the edits committed to the article since the beginning of 2009 (since before I started editing Wikipedia). I see the great majority of edits over that span have been vandalism (often by I.P. editors, presumably teenagers, inserting the names of their classmates in charts of IQ classifications) and reversions of vandalism (sometimes automatically by ClueBot). Just a few editors have referred to and cited published reliable sources on the topic of IQ classification. It is dismaying to see that the number of reliable sources cited in the article has actually declined over the last few years. To help the process of finding reliable sources for articles on psychology and related topics, I have been compiling a source list on intelligence since I became a Wikipedian in 2010, and I invite you to make use of those sources as you revise articles on Wikipedia and to suggest further sources for the source on the talk pages of the source list and its subpages. Because the IQ reference chart article has been tagged as needing expert attention for more than half a year, I have opened discussion on the article's talk page about how to fix the article, and I welcome you to join the discussion. The draft I have in my user sandbox shows my current thinking about a reader-friendly, well sourced way to update and improve the article. I invite your comments and especially your suggestions of reliable sources as the updating process proceeds. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 20:15, 28 May 2013 (UTC)