Cojovo

US presidential election, 2016

As an frequent contributor to the the article United States presidential election, 2016, your participation in this discussion would be helpful and appreciated. Thanks.--JayJasper (talk) 05:12, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 24 April

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Republican Party presidential candidates, 2016 page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:25, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

RfC

There is a Request for Comment now live on the Template talk:User WikiProject United States presidential elections. Your involvement in WikiProject means you may wish to consider commenting on your preferred outcome for this userbox. Spartan7W § 19:21, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:45, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Nutrition Party listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Nutrition Party. Since you had some involvement with the Nutrition Party redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. —Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 02:15, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

I have sockpuppetted, but I am not a sock of JayJasper

Okay. You caught me. I admit to socking as Rollins83, BrightonC, Dwc89, CPguy, Earlgrey T, Ddcm8991, Newbreeder, Romandave, Feel da J, Hm838, The Anti-Censor. But I am not a sock of JayJasper, Miss Cherry Redd, NextUSprez. Please don't punish these users for my misdeeds, I ask that you unblock them. I accept the indefinite ban as my behavior warrants it.--Cojovo (talk) 18:48, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

I will further confess to socks you didn't catch: Jcc7292, Cagey Slim, Eli775, Pnu15. My deepest apologies to Wikipedia and the editors falsely accused and penalized for my misdeeds. --Cojovo (talk) 19:16, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Well, this is getting reallyembarrassing, but I just remembered a few more: I.C. Rivers, Yessiree, dude!, and there's also about a half-dozen IP addresses that I can't find right now. Again, apologies to all. I'm out of here.--Cojovo (talk) 21:18, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

I've seen the discussion about this and I'm glad to know that my comments are being seen. First, I need to point out that earlier I had mistakenly put rollins83 in the "not sock" list and I've now corrected that. Rollins is me as well. I also want to respond to the comment about my statement "lacking any kind of credibility". Well, seeing that I've just been outed for sockpuppetting, I really can't complain about having my credibility questioned. But I do want to clear something up: I didn't claim, or mean to imply, that this account (Cojovo) was the "master"  It just so happened that that this is the account I happened to log into yesterday and got the word that I'd been blocked. So I  just used the talk page that I was aready logged into to come clean and also make clear which sockpuppets were me and which ones weren't. I think Rollins83 is the first account I had, but to be honest it's kind of hard to remember  (sad, I know). Looking at the discussion, it seems that JayJasper as wellas Nextusprez and Miss cherry might actually be sockpuppets  (of each other). I don't know, not my call to make and I'm certainly in no position to point fingers one way or the other. But I do want to reinterate that whether they are sockpuppets or they're not, they're not my sockpuppets. Because if someone gets blocked for their own transgressions that's one thing,but I would never want anyone being wrongly penalized as a result of my misdeeds.

Lastly, I just want everyone to know, for whatever it's worth, that I never meant to do any harm or disprespect the wikipedia community, though I now realize that's just what I did. I just thought it would be fun to edit as different "personas".  And, honestly it was fun for a while, but I now fully admit it was a total dick move on my part, plain and simple, and I have no excuses. I only hope that, despite all my mischief, I've made some kind f lasting positive contribution to wikipedia. I also hope that at some point in the future, I'll be able to edit and contribute to wikipedia again, but this time the right way, no sockpuppetting, no shenanigans, just good editing. I have a feeling that may a long time from now. So be it,I made my bed....you know the rest. Well,  I guess it's time for me to stop running my trap before I get myself into more trouble. Later (I hope).--Cojovo (talk) 15:21, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Chris Keniston for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Chris Keniston is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chris Keniston (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Bearcat (talk) 17:09, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Cojovo. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)