User talk:Tooth Dover

Welcome!

Hello, Tooth Dover, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Kendra Haste. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing 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 for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 14:35, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Let's be clear here @Patar knight:, I'm assuming you are aware that User talk:DanielRigal is the same person as Tooth Dover. In the event Daniel want's to disagree I have no doubt some sysop will confirm, (other than your admin self). On the basis of a message I will shortly leave on your own page I would hope to demonstrate you have no more authority than a person who pretends anonymity, as Daniel has done, to weald an axe to the Kendra Haste article. As I demonstrated on the talk page of that article I was happy to accommodate criticism, but I was not willing to throw my baby out with the bathwater for a man who had to create a new userpage just to criticize me.

Who are you thanking here Patar - the deletionist User talk:DanielRigal, or the user he created to hide behind - or yourself - who argued some time ago for one image only for this article. Mark^Dask 22:24, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Like I said on my talk page, you should assume good faith. Either present your evidence for the supposed sockpuppetry to |the proper forum where a Checkuser might do an IP check if you have good evidence, or stop casting aspersions and strike your claims against DanielRigal and myself. Also, please see WP:OWN, generally no one has the right to forbid others from editing "their" pages – it's a community process. ---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 00:32, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am not terribly familiar with Wikipedia editing but as a Archaeologist and lecturer I use Wikipedia every almost day. I studied Art History I am shocked occasionally by bad Wikipedia referencing and bizarre bullying that casual editors receive when trying to help. I have been accused of being a sock puppet. Please feel free to launch an investigation as I am not Daniel Rigal (tooth-archaeology, dover- I live here). This is exactly why I have steered clear of editing because I have other things to do with my time. In the case of Kendra Haste, I had to contribute and see I was right to do so. I hope I have replied in the correct place to these accusations, but feel it does not matter much as I shall be involving myself little with this lark.Tooth Dover (talk) 11:58, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Don't let yourself be bitten by your poor reception. As I noted on Talk:Kendra Haste, your criticism was mostly correct. I hope you stay and improve other articles that you are familiar and/or interested in.@Markdask: You should either retract your accusations against Tooth Dover, DanielRigal, and myself and apologize, or take it to WP:SPI. ---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 02:57, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'd just like to say that I have less than no idea what this is about but if anybody wants to make a complete fool of themselves by falsely accusing me of sockpuppetry I'll have a damn good laugh when the results of the Checkuser come in.

Seriously though. I am utterly mystified by this. I had no idea that I had even upset anybody on this subject. I have no idea at all why I should be linked to Tooth Dover. I am particularly mystified as to why the accusation seems to come from a long-standing Wikipedian who should definitely know better and might be in line for a boomerang if this continues.

To Tooth Dover, I'd just like to back up what Patar knight says. Don't let false accusations of Sockpuppety bother you. We have a robust and fair system for investigating and dealing with sockpuppets. The Checkuser tool is highly effective in finding out which claims of sockpuppetry are real and which are not. If either or both of us are formally reported this can only end badly for the accuser who has absolutely no basis for these bizarre claims. We have nothing to worry about here. --DanielRigal (talk) 18:40, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet Investigation

Hi Tooth Dover.

Please don't panic but User:Markdask has opened a sockpuppet investigation into the two of us. You should have been notified of this as soon as the fiasco started but you have not been (which is pretty damn shoddy) so I thought I should let you know. The discussion is going on here:

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/DanielRigal

Yes, this is really stupid and annoying but I just want you to know that it is nothing to worry about. I have already explained how foolish the baseless allegation is. You can either make a statement or not as you see fit. You certainly don't have to. I think the foolishness of the allegation speaks for itself. My main purpose in having my say there was to vent my annoyance and to ask for a WP:BOOMERANG for our accuser. I know that it might not be as easy for you to be so blasé about this as you are relatively new here but I just wanted to, A, keep you in the loop and, B, reassure you that this nonsense will go away as soon as a few admins look at it and see how incredibly silly it is. Please do not let this discourage you. --DanielRigal (talk) 18:35, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]