User talk:MolehillMtn
Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure![edit]
- Hi MolehillMtn! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
-- 03:25, Monday, April 6, 2020 (UTC)
| Mission 1 | Mission 2 | Mission 3 | Mission 4 | Mission 5 | Mission 6 | Mission 7 |
| Say Hello to the World | An Invitation to Earth | Small Changes, Big Impact | The Neutral Point of View | The Veil of Verifiability | The Civility Code | Looking Good Together |
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message[edit]
 | Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
Updating General Dynamics Wikipedia article[edit]
Hi MolehillMtn, I noticed you recently made some edits to the General Dynamics Wikipedia article. Would you be interested to further collaborate on the article? I have a COI with the company, and just posted some suggestions on the talk page. Let me know if you'd be interest to take a look at them! Thanks in advance. --Chefmikesf (talk) 18:51, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi Chefmikesf, I would be interested in collaborating with you, but I haven't done that before, so I'd need some guidance. Sounds like it'd be interesting to learn though. MolehillMtn (talk) 04:39, 15 January 2021 (UTC) MolehillMtn
- Hi MolehillMtn, Thanks for sharing your interest in collaborating and your experience thus far. As a Conflict of Interest editor I represent the company to improve the article. To make sure I'm compliant to Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide, I proposed factual updates on the talk page, then ask other Wikipedians to review, provide feedback, and publish when the content meets Wikipedia's guidelines.
- Please feel free to read the two project pages and let me know if you have any questions. Also let me know if you can see my suggestions on the GD talk page.--Chefmikesf (talk) 23:16, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
MolehillMtn (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Hi, I am not sure why my account has been blocked and I'm very confused as to why my account would be connected in any way to another account. I don't know and am in no way connected to VentureKit (or any other account). I'm just me, and I only have my one account. I do sometimes use my desktop and my laptop, but that's the only difference. I'm still learning my way around Wikipedia, and I have been trying to make edits that are helpful (some small as I learn, and some larger to update information on pages that interest me), so any kind advice is welcome. In re-reading and trying to understand the investigations page, it seems like I used similar language of "reorganized for clarity", and that was bad? I have been trying indicate what I did on pages, so other editors are clear on what I did, but I guess I do repeat phrases I have used in the past in my descriptions. I also see something about proxies, and I'm happy to help with any info I can provide on that front. Thank you for your review and for any help to avoid issues in the future!
Decline reason:
"but I guess I do repeat phrases I have used in the past in my descriptions". So, yes, as I read it, that's admitting to the sockpuppetry. — Daniel Case (talk) 04:11, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
. MolehillMtn (talk) 18:17, 16 February 2021 (UTC)MolehillMtn
- Daniel Case, I read that differently: MolehillMtn frequently re-uses the same edit-summary. When I compare MolehillMtn's top edit summaries to those of VentureKit, I see that MolehillMtn used Added punctuation 102 times and Fixed punctuation 29 times. VentureKit's pattern is quite different: used citation cleanup 10 times. The two have never used the same edit summary in their most recent 500 edits that I checked.
Hello, thank you for responding, and for your time. You are correct in that I do re-use my own phrases "Added punctuation" and "Fixed punctuation" for my edit-summaries, because those were the changes I made to those pages. They actually auto-populate when I click on publish changes, so I thought using my own phrases again showed consistency for my account. You seem to agree with me that that shows that I am my own person, and not connected to any other. As you point out, they are unique to me, so wouldn't that show that I am indeed not a sockpuppet? There is nothing for me to "admit to" because I am just me, with only my one account. I am really hoping that I am allowed to continue being a member of the Wikipedia community. Thank you again for your time, effort, & help! MolehillMtn (talk) 20:00, 17 February 2021 (UTC)MolehillMtn