User talk:Wayn12

Kevin Samuels birth date

I noticed you undid my update on the Kevin Samuels page. Let's avoid an edit war scenario. Do you have a notable media link that has Kevin Samuels' birth certificate? If not, your edit is not justified

Kunkuru (talk) 20:07, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The NY Times Article linked has his date of birth. Your circa DOB off an interview is not justified. Wayn12 (talk) 00:32, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New York Times: Kevin Samuels was born on March 13, 1965, according to Mr. Spurling, who said he was survived by his mother and a daughter.

Now please stop vandalizing the page. Wayn12 (talk) 00:57, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a suspected sock puppet of Philly2166 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · logs · block log · arb · rfc · lta · SPI · cuwiki) that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this is a sock puppet account, and your original account is blocked, please also note that banned or blocked users are not allowed to edit Wikipedia; and all edits made under this account may be reverted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. NeilN ^{talk to me} 00:46, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am not Philly2166. This is embarassing; not even getting your investigation right. I guess it's because it's Wikipedia? Wayn12 (talk) 05:20, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Block appeal

@NeilN: Compare my edits (for 6 years) to the Philly2166's. Dennis Bratland seems to be mistaken and doesn't know what he's talking about. Also, I've contributed good edits to Wikipedia; that could also be checked, I guess. Wayn12 (talk) 13:36, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain your connection to Svengalista --NeilN ^{talk to me} 13:44, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@NeilN: I've had my account for about seven years. And yes, I opened the Svengalista account on Tuesday (I'm sure that was explained by Sangboeuf on his report with good evidence) but Dennis Bratland doesn't know what he is saying and provided no good evidence, and you blocked me for being Philly2166???

Wayn12 (talk) 13:54, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've reduced your block to one week for sock puppetry for now. The other account will remain indefinitely blocked. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 14:05, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@NeilN:I had good reason to open another page; I wanted to work on a host of pages that had a lot of grammatical errors and uncited information. Blocking it after only one or two edits seems ridiculous. And the edit I made on "Ijeoma Oluo" with that account was cited and is probably the most appropriate information that should be there. Will vandal Dennis Bratland receive any penalty for accusing people of sock puppetry without solid evidence and dragging them to ANI for it? Isn't that a violation of Wikipedia's civility policy? He didn't provide any evidence and you, assuming you aren't his sock puppet, took his word over evidence he was going to provide on Saturday? He seems to have been overly obsessed with Philly2166 and his nature of edits.

Wayn12 (talk) 14:33, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You're complaining now of getting blocked for sock puppetry when you were in fact socking? If you want to go down that route then please make an unblock request following the instructions in the block template and another admin will review the situation. However refer to Dennis Bratland as a vandal again and I will extend the block. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 14:38, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@NeilN: How will extending the block on an account that has been here for seven years help?? Can you please explain??

Wayn12 (talk) 14:50, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It will stop an editor with 218 edits from personally attacking an editor 50,000+ edits (and yes, calling a good faith editor a vandal is a personal attack). Usually I don't pay attention to edit count but as you seem to think being here seven years is an excuse for poor behavior... --NeilN ^{talk to me} 15:04, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@NeilN:I don't care about how many edits anyone here has, especially since the one edit of his I know of is wrong and most likely filled with some prejudice. And also because he linked me with an account I had nothing to do with. And he called me a vandal on here, and you didn't consider that a personal attack anywhere? I haven't opened another account yet, because I'm still, in good faith, trying to understand the reasoning behind blocking an account that has been here for seven years, trying to help, after realizing how the site is in shambles, due to wrong, uncited, information, errors and actual "vandals." At least, I return occasionally and didn't leave it in the abyss after one or two edits. It is likely that that will be my 218th edit as you have successfully chased me out of the site. How is that going to help Wikipedia? Wayn12 (talk) 17:37, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Where did Dennis call you a vandal? Provide a diff please. And opening another account is going to get that account and this account indefinitely blocked. You realize that, right? Do not edit war. Do not use multiple accounts. Both actions are not "trying to help" - they're just trying to force your preferred wording into articles. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 18:05, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You must be Dennis Bratland, but at this point I don't want to engage anymore. I still stand by my edit of "Ijeoma Oluo." I tried to engage on the Talk page, mentioning that her page referred to her as only an "American" writer, even before I added my edit. That it will probably be more appropriate, but Dennis Bratland insisted that it will be African-American, which the author does not even identify as. Goodbye. Wayn12 (talk) 18:50, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@NeilN: Interesting! Sangdeboeuf is trying to link me to some recent edits to "Carmen Maria Machado" by some IP adress, even after I said goodbye to editing weeks ago. I didn't log out of my account and was surprised to see someone mention me. You might want to block my account permanently, so that he/she can get some peace of mind. Note, how whoever is behind the account crept back to "Ijeoma Oluo" to change the information back to "American"; I guess I was making some good points earlier. The whole thing is getting ridiculous at this point, with accounts obsessing over other accounts.

Wayn12 (talk) 21:34, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note that Ijeoma Oluo’s page does not say African American because she does not identify. You spent 17 yrs doing nonsense editing. Wayn12 (talk) 01:25, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wayn12, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community. Sangdeboeuf (talk) 21:12, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dude I'm logging out of my account. Keep communicating with ghosts.

Wayn12 (talk) 21:35, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:32, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:35, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:41, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:31, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]