User talk:Mike.Dickard

William Hale

Provide evidence that this supposed individual exists, and you won't get reverted. As he seems to be invisible on Google (apart from your additions to Wikipedia), it appears more likely that you're engaged in vandalism. In which case, please stop. Dave.Dunford (talk) 12:00, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Hi Dave! It seems we’re in need for a chat as their appears to be some confusion ! Mike.Dickard (talk) 16:30, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for bringing to my attention these horrifying issues you have raised some relevant some seem as if you’ve got an obsession with said ‘William Hale’ I will provide you with all the relevant information I have been inquiring regarding the Hale ! Please note that their are numerous such William Hale’s ! However can you really provide me with the evidence that you cannot actually find any of the information relevant to said Hale. Mike.Dickard (talk) 16:33, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Supposed vandal

I believe I was set up. Fed fake information which I have now been under scrutiny for ! Dave Dunford is suspicious here, he was bringing up the hoax content on the Coal Aston talk page totally irrelevant to the hoax and the comment I put there. Furthermore, Dunford has gained from this fake information as he looks a saviour! I made them edits in good faith even saying I would apply references later ! Mike.Dickard (talk) 16:57, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

As I said on my talk page, if you can't find a reliable source, you shouldn't be adding it to Wikipedia. And since your edits seem to make claims about this person that are obviously contradictory, I'm finding it hard to assume good faith. Dave.Dunford (talk) 17:08, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Contradictory? there can be numerous William Hale’s can their not ! I was handed a source which related to The wWilliam Hale name, I would provide such references however it seems it’s a hoax ! Mike.Dickard (talk) 17:10, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Sockpuppet investigation

You are suspected of sockpuppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, then, if you wish to do so, respond to the evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Reverend Colman Trembley. Thank you. Dave.Dunford (talk) 17:38, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

So be it ! I hope my innocence is proved ! Mike.Dickard (talk) 18:51, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Blocked as a sockpuppet

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Reverend Colman Trembley per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Reverend Colman Trembley. 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 ~~~~}}.  Bbb23 (talk) 00:12, 12 April 2022 (UTC)