User talk:Runreston

Sockpuppetry case

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Racepacket (2nd) for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page.

Checkuser says User:Runreston is not User:Racepacket. I've unblocked this account, but I know about the other one, please choose one and stick too it. — Rlevse • Talk • 22:42, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More evidence, CU now says "likely", see my talkpage. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:13, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of D'Angelo Natural Spring Water

A tag has been placed on D'Angelo Natural Spring Water requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Jfire (talk) 19:27, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Continued sockpuppetry

It's considered polite to notify the other party when you believe there is an issue. Here is my response to your nonsense at WP:ANI: The bigger question is why User:Runreston has not been banned as an abusive sockpuppet of User:Racepacket as was the result of The most recent sockpuppet check. Racepacket, together with his earlier sockpuppets User:Xcstar and User:207.91.86.2 (see Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Racepacket), has been joined by Runreston. I do not know what the nature of the monomaniacal obsession is, but some 90% of User:Racepacket's edit history has been dedicated to the Dane Rauschenberg article (and other directly related articles), following directly in the footsteps of Xcstar's edit history, which also topped off at about 90% of his 300 odd edits. It is extremely hard to understand why there was no follow through to ban both User:Runreston and his puppetmaster User:Racepacket, in light of the "likely" finding of the SSP request, but in light of this continued abuse of article and abuse of process, it's well past time to give the both of them the permanent heave ho. Alansohn (talk) 00:15, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ANI incident reported

The fact that you are still able to edit after being identified as a likely sockpuppet of User:Racepacket has been posted as the subject of an incident at WP:ANI unser "Confirmed sockpuppet User:Runreston still active". You can respond to the issues raised there. Alansohn (talk) 12:56, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]