User talk:Citypark2008

Welcome!

Hello, Citypark2008, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Gwandoya (talk) 01:09, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Boubaker polynomials (2nd nomination)

Hi. Your comments at this deletion debate were moved to the talk page of the debate, found at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Boubaker polynomials (2nd nomination). This was done so that discussion of the issues you raise can take place outside of the debate specifically on the merits of the article and whether it should be deleted. OTher comments, from other editors, were also moved. Please do not re-add them to the debate page, but feel free to revise or extend your remarks on the talk page, and to reply to other editors who may respond. Thank you. UltraExactZZ ^Claims~ Evidence 14:52, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I moved your comments very specifically to permit discussion on the issues you raise. Continuing to re-add the comments to the debate page itself may be viewed as disruptive, and could constitute a violation of the 3 revert rule, which in turn could result in your being blocked from editing. Please keep discussion on the discussion page. Thank you again. UltraExactZZ ^Claims~ Evidence 14:57, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Best, UltraExactZZ ^Claims~ Evidence 15:34, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I meant no offense to anyone. There appeared to be some abuse on other wikis, and some indications that similar abuse was starting here. If that's indeed the case, then checkuser actions may be required - and I recommended that he (Clem23) seek their counsel. Checkuser is not for fishing, and some evidence of disruption would be required. If a request moves forward, it does so because there was actual disruption, but I am aware of no such request as yet. I've blocked two obvious sockpuppets (newly registered names that mimic Clem23's), but - even with accusations made in the debate and elsewhere - I've taken no further administrative action. I'd characterize my response as "If you think there are problems, talk to these people" rather than outright blocking on anyone's say-so. UltraExactZZ ^Claims~ Evidence 15:47, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]