User talk:Mikerichi

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Mikerichi, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using 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 your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Dreaded Walrus t c 09:48, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sock puppet?

I saw your nomination of Sons of Ben (MLS fan club) for deletion from Wikipedia. I also noticed that this is your only contribution to Wikipedia, but you show definite familiarity with Wikipedia's deletion policies and procedures. Are you usually logged in as someone else, or is this really your only contribution to Wikipedia? Rolando (talk) 22:18, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the unfounded accusation, but you'll see that I was not familiar with the deletion policies when you notice that I screwed up the tags on my deletion notice and the tags needed to be fixed. It's good to know that you have the same lack of integrity as your diving countrymen by making your false accusation despite the fact that 5 or 6 "yes" voters also have no other contributions to Wikipedia. But hey, why accuse them of being sock puppets when you can accuse me, right? Keep on diving! :) Mikerichi (talk) 09:14, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Come on now Mike, it was a kindly-worded question, so no need for the incivility. Rolando, if you have the suspicion that this may be a sockpuppet, and you don't feel it is being used in a legit manner, you know where requests for checkuser is. Dreaded Walrus t c 10:07, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
You and I have different definitions of "kindly-worded". 4 of the "keep" votes in the "Sons of Ben" deletion discussion were from users who had no other contributions to Wikipedia other than those "keep" votes, so why did User:Ronaldo single me out for the sock puppet accusations? Obviously because he agreed with them and disagreed with me. Had I been the only new user, it would be a different story, but to overlook the other 4 while singling me out is bias, plain and simple. And for the record, I found out about this Sons of Ben page because I was at the Dark Horse watching Manchester United play Portsmouth and this loud, obnoxious drunk of the lot that makes Man United supporters in the US look bad kept going on and on about American soccer. (I was born in Rochdale but I've lived in the US long enough that most people think I sound like a Yank) He kept telling us how this "Sons of Ben" group is "endorsed by Wikipedia" so I checked it out and realized that not only is there no such endorsement, but this page was created a few days after they made their group! Mikerichi (talk) 10:54, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Not to mention that when someone comes to my talk page and personally attacks me for no reason (there were 5 first time contributors in that discussion, 1 delete and 4 keeps, so why single out the delete to accuse of sock puppetry?), why am I the one who's accused of being "uncivil?" He came here to attack me and not vice versa. Mikerichi (talk) 10:59, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
I think on many points I agree with you. The Wikipedia article in question is even linked from the "SoB community" section of their website's homepage. As for the reason why he singled you out, I can assume it is because it takes a lot longer to find out how to nominate an article for deletion than it does to comment on an article already up for deletion (when an article is nominated for deletion, the link to the debate is right there at the top of the page). AfDs for things like this regularly have single-purpose accounts, so I tagged them as such (admittedly, I tagged yours with the same, as your account currently fits the definition). As the one who initially posted the welcome template to your talk page, I hope you can continue on with being a valid contributor, so that noone has any doubts. :) Dreaded Walrus t c 11:08, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
And, I've just had an edit conflict, so a response to your second paragraph. Much of it I feel is answered in my above paragraph, but the friendly civility notice (I didn't think your message warranted a proper warning template) I gave just to let you know the rules we go by here. :) Dreaded Walrus t c 11:08, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Dreaded Walrus: Thanks, and I'll keep it in mind.
MikeRichi: I thought that asking you on your talk page was more civil than making the comment in the AfD discussion. In fact, if you look at the edit history over there, you'll see that I included a less civil version of the above in my initial response, which I removed immediately. In any case, I expect participants in an AfD discussion to be newcomers (especially in a football/soccer fan group discussion, for goodness' sake).
However, usually nominators have some history and knowledge of what constitutes an article for deletion. When I contributed to the discussion yesterday, I was thinking that it was very presumptuous for a first time editor to recommend something for deletion, when (s)he ostensibly hasn't contributed anything to the encyclopedia. I'm not sure if there should be a double standard there, but in my mind, there is one. In any case, I apologize that I've offended you and I honestly hope that the article stays around and gets the edits it needs to be less of a fan page and more a legitimate article. Cheers. Rolando (talk) 15:00, 4 February 2008 (UTC)