Prisongangleader
 | An editor has expressed a concern that this account may be a sockpuppet of Fredrick day (talk · contribs · logs). Please refer to editing habits or contributions of the sockpuppet for evidence. This policy subsection may be helpful. Account information: block log – contribs – logs – abuse log – CentralAuth |
hi
Welcome!
edit
|
slow down
editdon't get past 3RR on that page. It is better to let the page stand in a version you dislike than to get blocked for reverting it too much, just FYI. Protonk (talk) 18:27, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
hi
Welcome!
edit
|
Moved
editCo-opping people into your project seems a little bent to me (I came here via an article you are saving). You should ask those editors if they want to be a member of this specific project. --Prisongangleader (talk) 17:53, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
- Hold on a minute - isn't meta a separate project - why is an article there being redirected here with no discussion there? --Prisongangleader (talk) 17:56, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
- Oh it isn't that big of a deal. No one was at WICU anyway. I can't speak to the AIW/project:inclusionism mergers, but the WICU one was fine and should have been done earlier. Protonk (talk) 17:57, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
- Prisongangleader and Protonk thanks for your hard work and comments. Prisongangleader thanks for your concerns. Redirecting articles is really common between projects. Inclusionist (talk) 18:07, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
- Merging content is fine - merging members isn't it - that's bent. You might argue that the core aims are the same but that's not an assumption you should make on behalf of other editors. They need to be asked. --Prisongangleader (talk) 18:04, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
- Prisongangleader: good point. Who would you like me to ask I would love to ask them. Can you help me? I will probably need a bot to do it though, are you familiar with bots?
- Prison, since the handful of edits you have been involved with involves deleting articles, Special:Contributions/Prisongangleader I wonder how concerned you are about this projects goals and aspirations, especially since inclusionist members would probably fight against those AfDs.
- In addition, it looks like you wikistalked me from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Star Wars vs. Star Trek Inclusionist (talk) 18:06, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
- Merging content is fine - merging members isn't it - that's bent. You might argue that the core aims are the same but that's not an assumption you should make on behalf of other editors. They need to be asked. --Prisongangleader (talk) 18:04, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
- Prisongangleader and Protonk thanks for your hard work and comments. Prisongangleader thanks for your concerns. Redirecting articles is really common between projects. Inclusionist (talk) 18:07, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
- Oh it isn't that big of a deal. No one was at WICU anyway. I can't speak to the AIW/project:inclusionism mergers, but the WICU one was fine and should have been done earlier. Protonk (talk) 17:57, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
- you might object to me asking those questions but you don't just get to wipe the questions from the history. My point is this - as a general principle - editors should not be co-opped into projects they did not sign up for. They should be asked - is this as a general principle unacceptable to anyone? --Prisongangleader (talk) 18:19, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
- I'm gonna have to go with PGL on this. removing legit questions is pretty uncool. Also, I hope this ("I wonder how concerned you are about this projects goals and aspirations, especially since inclusionist members would probably fight against those AfDs. ") characterization does not accurately describe the ARS, because that is almost the opposite of what the project page says. Protonk (talk) 18:22, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
- Hold on a minute - isn't meta a separate project - why is an article there being redirected here with no discussion there? --Prisongangleader (talk) 17:56, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
(removed) Inclusionist (talk) 18:28, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
Don't respond to this!
editPGL. do not say a word in response to the above. Protonk (talk) 18:30, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
Blocked
editI have blocked this account as a self-evident sockpuppet. If your previous account is not blocked, please return to it. If it is, then don't use alternate accounts to evade the block. Guy (Help!) 19:00, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
Your talk page is fully protected, so I'll ask here for you to reconsider this block. There is no evidence presented either extemporaneously or at SSP that this account is a sock of a banned user. If the account is not an account of a banned user, there is little cause to ban it based on Wikipedia:SOCK#Legitimate_uses_of_alternative_accounts. I hope you will respond here or on my talk page. Protonk (talk) 19:17, 26 July 2008 (UTC)- NVM, clicked on "help". Posting comment to talk page. Protonk (talk) 19:22, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
RFCU
editHey, you've been included in a checkuser case here: Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Prisongangleader. You are free to make a statement there or present exculpatory evidence. Protonk (talk) 03:35, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
This doesn't mean I agree with your block, there is just some evidence that the block may be being skirted and I don't think that is appropriate. Protonk (talk) 03:35, 27 July 2008 (UTC)