User talk:Kaienhakuto
Nomination of Reunion Island: An Overview for deletion
The article Reunion Island: An Overview is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reunion Island: An Overview until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good 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 template from the top of the article. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:34, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
Sockpuppetry case
|
Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kaienhakuto for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:44, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
Multiple accounts
First off, I want to say that I am impressed it is good that you admitted to sockpuppeting. I think you already know that editors are restricted to one account, and that if you continue to edit through multiple accounts, you will be blocked from editing. I sincerely hope this issue does not have to be explored again. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 02:41, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
- I for one am not so impressed, as you have used your multiple accounts, including this one, in an attempt to suppress a deletion discussion so as to benefit yourself in what seems to be a clear conflict of interest. It seems to me that the closing admin has rather missed the point: this was not simply a case of someone simply using multiple accounts, and I'm a bit disappointed that he's chosen to accept your version of events, when the edit history shows a very different story, one of a pattern of disruptive and deceptive editing, including lying in your edit summary about 'bug fixes' to cover your tracks. That said, I see that other editor has indeed placed a speedy delete tag per your offer, and so hopefully the matter will be settled soon. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 02:52, 17 January 2011 (UTC)