User talk:Decuw

 Hello Decuw, and Welcome to Wikipedia!  Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page – I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.

--- Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:


 * Table of contents


 * Department directory

Need help?


 * Questions – a guide on where to ask questions
 * Cheatsheet – quick reference on Wikipedia's mark-up codes
 * Wikipedia's 5 pillars – an overview of Wikipedia's foundations


 * Article wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles
 * The simplified ruleset – a summary of Wikipedia's most important rules
 * Guide to Wikipedia – a thorough step-by-step guide to Wikipedia

How you can help:


 * Contributing to Wikipedia – a guide on how you can help


 * Community portal – Wikipedia's hub of activity

Additional tips...


 * Please sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes ( ~ ). This will automatically insert your "signature" (your username and a date stamp). The [[File:Button sig.png]] or [[File:Insert-signature.png]] button, on the tool bar above Wikipedia's text editing window, also does this.


 * If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills the Sandbox is for you.

Decuw, good luck, and have fun. – Jnanaranjan Sahu (ଜ୍ଞାନ) talk 06:11, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Removing AfD template
Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates, as you did with Jennifer Rattray. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. This is an automated message from a bot about, where you removed the deletion template from an article before the deletion discussion was complete. If this message is in error, please report it.— cyberbot I NotifyOnline 00:03, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

you have basically given me a Wiki death sentence based on the fact that a team of separate people wanted to set the record straight on one or two pages. Must I be silenced forever because some people think that the person whose page I was editing (with citations!) is a folk hero? I thought this was supposed to be a marketplace of ideas? Further, most of those socks are not me, and just because checkuser found an IP address or two in common - I have explained this. There was several of us living in this house all involved on the UW wiki project. How long must I remain in purgatory? Surely I am not the first wiki editor to work in a collective? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Decuw (talk • contribs) 03:25, 14 April 2014‎
 * The evidence of sockpuppetry does not depend only on the fact that "checkuser found an IP address or two in common". I have examined the behavioural evidence very carefully, and I am totally convinced that this account has been used by a person who has also used several other accounts. And no, Wikipedia is not "supposed to be a marketplace of ideas". Assuming you mean that it is a place for different people to put forward their own original ideas, then Wikipedia policy is that it is nothing of the sort: it is merely a convenient reference point for holding records of information which is already established and documented. original ideas are unacceptable. I also note with interest that you say "most of those socks are not me", which seems to be an implicit admission that some of them are. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 13:35, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Since you really can't find any reasons to unblock, don't seem to understand the purpose of Wikipedia, and have inadvertently provided further evidence in support of the socking allegations, I have revoked your talk page access. You will have to request unblock through email from now on. Daniel Case (talk) 22:27, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

 Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive. ([ block log] • [ active blocks] • [ global blocks] • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • [ abuse filter log] • [ • change block settings • [ unblock] • [ checkuser] ([ log]))

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If you have already appealed to the Unblock Ticket Request System and been declined you may appeal to the Arbitration Committee's Ban Appeals Subcommittee. Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice. Daniel Case (talk) 22:27, 14 April 2014 (UTC)