User talk:Salazar
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hey, Salazar, welcome to Wikipedia. I'm wondering whether I should run a book on who you really are. Great fun. Anyway, thought I'd say hello since our paths have crossed. Dr Zen 07:12, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- I vote this is a monologue. Just my guess. dab (ᛏ) 10:44, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- No, I bet whoever it is uses the ID again and I've just beaten the crowd. Do you mind not chasing my contributions around and carping? It's most disconcerting to see you on my watchlist following in my footsteps!Dr Zen 10:56, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
sorry, forget it. People wonder whether you also appear under other usernames, but I claim ignorance, and withdraw all allegations. dab (ᛏ) 12:26, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Sockpuppet. I'm not saying you are one, I'm not saying you're not, ok? Just forget I ever said something, please. dab (ᛏ) 13:15, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Hello
Regarding your question on my talk page, yes you are entirely allowed to edit. It's just that very few editors as new as you have a full understanding of Wikipedia policies, and fewer know about all of the policy decisions and voting that goes on in the background. Generally, when someone's first edits are votes, it implies that they are a sockpuppet of another editor. Your edits seem to be be genuine, though, and I apologise if I've discouraged you from editing further. Dork. —Ben Brockert (42) UE News 16:30, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)
-
- and it's just fine for you to vote on things too, unless there is a specific request to not vote if you are a new user. Welcome. Pedant 19:57, 2005 Jan 12 (UTC)
[edit] Quotations vs. italics
Hi, no problem, but we do use quotation marks in this setting. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Quotation_marks. Best, Meelar (talk) 01:12, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Arbitration
I have just requested arbitration to deal with your behavior, as a sockpuppet of Libertas (along with Ollieplatt). You are free to respond at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration. RadicalSubversiv E 09:13, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)
[edit] ArbCom final ruling
[edit] Remedies
[edit] Ban for disruptive behaviour
1) User:Libertas, Salazar, Ollieplatt, Razalah, Jennypratt, Suna, Dean12, Viewvista, Fylc, Billclinton, Anilingus, and Nutrosnutros (hereafter called Libertas and associated sockpuppets) are banned for one year from editing Wikipedia for disruptive behaviour.
- Passed 9-0 on 00:12, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Revert limitation
2) Libertas and associated sockpuppets are limited to one revert per twenty-four hour period; should this be violated they will be banned for up to twenty-four hours.
- Passed 9-0 on 00:12, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Sockpuppet accounting
3.1) Libertas is prohibited from having any sockpuppet accounts. Prior to this ban taking effect Libertas or any of the above sockpuppets may choose one and only one account to be declared a "primary account"; the rest will be considered sockpuppet accounts and will be infinitely blocked. If such a declaration is not made within 24 hours after the case closes, the primary account shall be assumed to be Ollieplatt. A violation of this prohibition will result in a month-long ban per violation, to run consecutively, that may be imposed by any administrator.
- Passed 9-0 on 00:12, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Identity of user
4) These remedies are phrased in terms of User:Libertas, but apply to all the accounts of the user behind the listed accounts. For example, should Libertas never edit again (or prove to be a different user) these remedies continue to apply to the accounts as a group and they should pick a principal account to edit with, where, for example, a list of accounts would be maintained.
- Passed 9-0 on 00:12, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Libertas for findings of fact and principles. An admin will implement the block shortly.
