Jump to content

User talk:Jack Sebastian: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
Line 8: Line 8:
__TOC__
__TOC__
{{My talk archives|[[/Archive 1|1. 2010: 4.16 - 11.02]]}}
{{My talk archives|[[/Archive 1|1. 2010: 4.16 - 11.02]]}}

{{welcome}}


== IP talkpages ==
== IP talkpages ==

Revision as of 01:39, 4 November 2010

Welcome!

Hi Jack Sebastian! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing!

IP talkpages

Your question at ANI was a good one. If an IP is stable then you will get the message. If your IP switches about then you will not. As this user made edits from the same IP on two different days [1] it looks likely that it does not change. As a test I just tried leaving a message for myself on my own IP talkpage and when I logged out I was informed I had a new message on that page (don't worry my IP and personal identitiy are well known to certain members of the community including arbcom :)). 194.66.0.122 (talk) 10:56, 3 November 2010 (UTC) Polargeo 2 (talk) 10:57, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments regarding me

Jack, I'm going to request that you please not carry out any more conversations like User talk:Polargeo 2#Re: IP talkpages, wherein you make statements about me such as " "I don't think the user is a puppetmaster or anything; I just think he should have owned up to the IP usage" and "I thought that denying an IP that you did use is pretty dishonest". You appear to be presenting me to others as someone who has socked, when I have not done any such thing. I'm not asking you to stop discussing checkuser policy or anything; that's all perfectly fine. I would simply like for you to not continue to make statements insinuating that I have committed any wrongdoing (or giving your opinion on the good- or bad-faith quality of my doings). Thank you. keɪɑtɪk flʌfi (talk) 19:07, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

With respect, I did not present you as a sock. Read the post again, Fluffy - I was seeking input on how to pursue RfCU in the future, as I had apparently handled the one regarding you so poorly that your claim that you weren't the IP in question was even challenged. More to the point, I did not name you when I asked for guidance; unfortunately, you have chosen to identify yourself. I did not call you - and am fairly certain that you are not - a sockmaster. I took special pains to keep your name from the discussion so as to make the question about how I should have pursued the action better, and nothing else. You should feel free to point out where I named you. Frankly, I think you just forgot to log in and were less than candid about that when asked twice. If it is bad faith to file an investigation I suspect socking, then there's a lot of bad faith occurring every time someone files a RfCU.
Moreover, it begs the question: why - after at least a month or two since we've had any contact whatsoever - are you stalking my edits? Shortly after the RfCU was declined, I removed you from my watchlist, and promptly forgot about you (though not the unusual action at CU). Please stop stalking my edits. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 20:18, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]