Jump to content

User talk:Ramdrake: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Ramdrake (talk | contribs)
→‎r&i: new section
Line 53: Line 53:
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, [[User:Mathsci|Mathsci]] ([[User talk:Mathsci|talk]]) 14:54, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
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, [[User:Mathsci|Mathsci]] ([[User talk:Mathsci|talk]]) 14:54, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
:Funny, that's exactly who I suspected he was. Merci inifiniment!--[[User:Ramdrake|Ramdrake]] ([[User talk:Ramdrake#top|talk]]) 17:48, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
:Funny, that's exactly who I suspected he was. Merci inifiniment!--[[User:Ramdrake|Ramdrake]] ([[User talk:Ramdrake#top|talk]]) 17:48, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

== r&i ==

please note the recent constructive debate on the subject.-- [[User:mustihussain|mustihussain]] ([[User talk:mustihussain|talk]]) 19:28, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 19:28, 2 August 2011

It is currently 01:55 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 ?

It's good to see you editing Race and intelligence again.

Right now while several I.P. editors are surfing by, it's good to have your eyes on the Race and intelligence article as the ArbCom case winds down. I look forward to digging into the sources with you to make sure that the article text reflects reliable sources well. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk) 15:56, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see the ArbCom case is proceeding and there may soon be clarity about where and how to edit articles on related topics. Keep up the good work till then, and, well, count on the admirals to soon be encouraged. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk) 16:16, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The following is a summary of the remedies enacted:

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee,

NW (Talk) 22:59, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Discuss this

I think you'd be interested in taking a look at this article. It is a GA.·Maunus·ƛ· 18:55, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Letter to The Economist January 29th–February 4th 2011

The ArbCom case on Race and intelligence is mentioned in a letter to The Economist.[1] -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 01:36, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

QuintupleTwist

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)[reply]

Funny, that's exactly who I suspected he was. Merci inifiniment!--Ramdrake (talk) 17:48, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

r&i

please note the recent constructive debate on the subject.-- mustihussain (talk) 19:28, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]