User talk:Rytch303

Welcome!

Hello, Rytch303, 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 on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome!

Wikipedia is fun and you can learn a lot. If you have a really good edit it will probably be kept. Good luck. Scifiintel (talk) 21:37, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unfounded Allegations of Sockpuppetry

I strongly suspect that Wndergirl (talk · contribs) is either your sockpuppet or meatpuppet. The user popped up for the first time in years to comment in a deletion discussion (after having only made one previous edit) [1], and the reasoning and format of their post was extremely similar to yours. [2] -- Scorpion ⁰⁴²² 23:40, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am not familiar with this editor. --Rytch303 (talk) 23:46, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Checkuser Dominic (talk · contribs) confirmed that you and the Wndergirl account have edited from the same city. That combined with the similarity of your edits leads me to believe you are in fact this person, and I have blocked you for 72 hours. Please do not engage in this activity in future. Thank you, PeterSymonds (talk) 00:38, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wndergirl (talk · contribs) is neither my sockpuppet nor my meatpuppet. Indeed, our respective arguments for the inclusion of the article in question (Women Inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame) clearly both arise from a feminist viewpoint (and these arguments are not all that complex), and I have no way of knowing if she and I both live in Baltimore, but I do know it is a metro area of over 2.5 million people. These items provide only circumstantial evidence. Furthermore, the editors who were arguing to delete the article were making the exact same argument amongst themselves as well, but no one seemed to delve into their collective effort. It has been (to say the least) very interesting to be on the receiving end of this little Wiki-witch-hunt, but it clearly displays what kind of powers-that-be really exist here. --Rytch303 (talk) 22:25, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The evidence:

Wndergirl's last edit was two years ago and the user suddenly popped up out of nowhere to comment in the afd. The editor had only made one previous edit.

Your statements were formatted very similar and you both has basically the same argument.

The checkuser confirmed that you both edited from the same city with the same ISP.

That's not circumstantial (if it was just the similarity of your arguments, then yes it would be), and how could we not be suspicious? If you feel you have been unjustly blocked, see Wikipedia:Blocking policy#Block reviews. -- Scorpion ⁰⁴²² 23:14, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, thanks for the advice. I'll do that. --Rytch303 (talk) 02:29, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Rytch303! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 2 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 475 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

Florenta Mihai - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
JoAnne Russell - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 05:58, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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) 13:59, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]