User talk:DoriSmith
Appearance
This is DoriSmith's talk page, where you can send her messages and comments. |
|
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 |
|
Note that I undid your revision. Please refer to the link that I provided regarding talks between the County and Vision Air, which operates from North Las Vegas Airport —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.112.213.29 (talk) 10:37, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
- When you did that reversion, you removed quite a bit of content, while not adding a whole lot useful. Let's take this discussion over to the article's talk page, okay? Dori (Talk • Contribs) 21:17, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
"Unnecessary" nbsp
Thanks for explaining the purpose of that nbsp. Stepheng3 (talk) 18:37, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts User:Thomasalazar > User:Diamond Joe Quimby > User:discospinster
Dori,
Back on May 1, you made this edit: Had to say it.
What did you make of the whole User:Thomasalazar > User:Diamond Joe Quimby > User:Discospinster Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts thing?
~ WikiDon (talk) 03:34, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
- Having taken a look at your case folder (a work in progress?), I think that we're in complete agreement. That was what it smelled like to me as well back then; I just didn't have the time to follow up on it. BTW, I didn't see a reference on your page to this—have you seen it? It might be worth adding as well.
- If there's anything I can do to help, please let me know. Dori (Talk • Contribs) 22:31, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, that is what happened here, I am certain. If you look at these accounts you seem the very same pattern, add images and questionable content, then when notices are left (either in the article as tags or on the user talk page) they are just deleted until the point at which the user gets tired of them and creates another account to bypass the tags and notices. Then repeats the process all over again. And then when Disco left at Wikietiquette (WE) on Thomasalazer (T(S)A) without any contact Diamond Joe Quimby leaves one on Dicso. Then in the very next stop for DJQ is RfA, and then immediately leaves that note on T(S)A. It is the same person talking to himself, no question. I didn't know (although Disco and you might have suspected) that DJQ was apart of this until I called sockpuppet on T(S)A and he stopped using that account, but the same articles that he edits are now being edited (again) by DJQ. Talk about handing it to me on a silver platter.
- Yes (again), I planned on using the whole RfA/note on T(S)A thing. It is pretty choice. I just didn't include it yet, until I did a little finger work (aka leg work) and put out some feelers like I did with you. I wanted to beat the bushes first and get some feedback. You will notice that after I accused T(S)A of being an SP in the WE (second against T(S)A) case he never edited again. He mostly likely saw all those IPs I had and decided to retreat to DJQ. But, that flushed him out. Disco must not be a good detective or would have figured this out when it happened. If you compare Disco's WE case against mine, well, I blasted T(S)A with so much. If you compare DJQ contrib timestamps to that of those of T(S)A you see that same pattern that I mapped out with T(S)A versus BradlyRM. You can see the same pattern of overlap. Again, I just didn't show that yet in my case folder. If you do think of anything else, jump in. I wouldn't mind if you did the DJQ v. T(S)A (BradlyRM) compare so it is more than one person presenting. I am a big fan of multiple petitioners. Thanks for you input and help. ~ WikiDon (talk) 23:17, 7 June 2008 (UTC)