User talk:BurritoTunnelMaintenance

Hi.

BurritoTunnelMaintenance, you are invited to the Teahouse![edit]

Hi BurritoTunnelMaintenance! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like GreenMeansGo (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:02, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Cooperative economics[edit]

I noticed you removed quite a lot of edits made in "Co-operative Economics" article saying they were vandalism. Can you explain why they were vandalism, and what was wrong with reasoning given for the edits you removed?

Leo Sammallahti (talk) 13:13, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

March 2022[edit]

Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0) License is not a cvompatible license. — Diannaa (talk) 22:47, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Diannaa: It's unfortunate that that still hasn't been fixed. See A bug in early Creative Commons Licences etc. It's unlikely that I'm going to be able to get the source to roll back to the insecure version of the license, but I'll see what I can do. BurritoTunnelMaintenance (talk) 09:41, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Scot Kerns controversy[edit]

Hello, I have noticed that I've been flagged by you as an alleged sock puppet of Scot Kerns. Is there some way that I can demonstrate that I am not actually him, and that when I initially created the article about him, I was acting in good faith? I don't know what he may have done to edit the article after I made it, but I haven't touched it in about a year. messor (talk) 04:57, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Being a sock puppet isn't fixable, beyond just not doing that anymore. Being an undisclosed connected editor, and a single purpose account, however, are fixable. Declare your connection on your user page and pick an area where you think you can help, and get to work. BurritoTunnelMaintenance (talk) 09:37, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I may be mistaken, but isn't a "sock puppet" a term for multiple accounts used by the same person? In this case, how was I ever a sock puppet? I only have this one account. Whatever Scot himself did was out of my control, which was my point. It sounded to me like the issue here is that the article was going to be deleted due to having been autobiographical, which it wasn't originally. Also, when I first submitted the article, it did say that I knew Scot personally, but that notice seems to have disappeared. If I have no intention of touching the article again, is it necessary to still have it? messor (talk) 21:31, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article is unlikely to be deleted as long as he holds elected office, because that confers notability. Once he's out of office, it's likely the article will be deleted, unless he does something inherently notable. Right now, there's no way for anyone on Wikipedia to differentiate you from Scot Kerns... Both of you have, thus far, engaged with Wikipedia solely for the purpose of getting an article about him in. If you want to differentiate yourself from him, do so: make yourself useful, contribute to the community. BurritoTunnelMaintenance (talk) 14:04, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My oldest edit is from 2005. I'm not the most active user on here, but still, I've edited articles having to do with a variety of topics, like music, the state of Michigan, and religion. This is why I'm confused about why anyone would think that this one article is all I've ever done on this site. messor (talk) 16:23, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Look, I'm just some dude. Convincing me, or not convincing me, of anything, buys you nothing. I answered your question; you can either pay attention to the answer, or not. BurritoTunnelMaintenance (talk) 11:38, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I had the idea that something was going to happen like my account would be deleted in order to get rid of duplicate accounts belonging to the same person, or something. I thought that you were in charge of something like that. One thing that I've never liked about Wikipedia is it never seems clear to me who is doing what. Since I seem to be mistaken, I won't bother you anymore. messor (talk) 02:11, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Internet Sanctions Project for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Internet Sanctions Project is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Internet Sanctions Project until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

MarioGom (talk) 21:05, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Bwoodcock per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Bwoodcock. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. --Blablubbs (talk) 09:07, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]