User talk:Excessively Brief

Welcome and introduction
Hi, Excessively Brief. This is NOT some automated message...it's from a real person. You can talk to me right now. Welcome to Wikipedia! I noticed you've just joined, and wanted to give you a few tips to get you started. If you have any questions, please talk to us. The tips below should help you to get Best of luck!  Chzz  ►  23:45, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Apologies in advance
Okay, apologies in advance for all the drama on the admin noticeboard, but we really need to know who you are and what your motives are. Are you actually a brand new user who has never edited Wikipedia before? It seems very strange that you would arrive at the Pershing article, engage in a highly controversial topic, and also begin posting to the admin noticeboard. Again, I am very sorry that you have stumbled onto all of this, but we have had major problems on that article's talk pages. Just tell us a bit about yourself so we can get this cleared up. Thanks! -OberRanks (talk) 01:32, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 * No. Decided to create a login (top right choice).  [What links here]from my talk = AN/I.  Thanks for asking. FYI Wiki interface is not unique to WP. Excessively Brief (talk) 01:40, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes. OR apparently thinks that you are me, as well. Sadly, you may as well get used to it. OR appears to bully any new editor who happens to agree with me on the John Pershing page. I honestly hope that a pro-censorship user appears "out of nowhere", as well. Wonder what OR will have to say about that. Certainly not what he's said to you. I also apologise in advance- for your having to deal with the likes of OberRanks. All the best-Mk5384 (talk) 04:18, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 * P.S. 8 to 5 says OberRanks reports me at ANI for apologising to you for his behaviour.Mk5384 (talk) 04:20, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 * One more thing. Please disregard OberRanks' statement that, "we really need to know who you are". It is absolutely none of his business who you are. However, I would consider it a great personal favour if you would, in fact, tell us. OberRanks and Baseball Bugs are waging a crusade to stultify and slander any new user on the Pershing page who disagrees with them. They need to be punished, or at least censured, or at the very minimum, stopped. Your coming forward would help. All the best-Mk5384 (talk) 04:55, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Courtesy note
You are receiving this message because an RFC has been initiated at Talk:John J. Pershing about a matter on which you may have commented in the past. Thank you, – xeno talk  15:53, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry case
Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Sockpuppet investigations/Mk5384 for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. Auntie E. (talk) 01:33, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Blocked
Frankly I don't care whose sockpuppet this is, the fact is, this is very obviously an alternate account used outside the permitted parameters of legitimate alternate accounts, see WP:SOCK. Please go back to your main account. Email me to get any autoblock lifted quietly. Guy (Help!) 07:51, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
 * You may not care who's it is, but I do, seeing that this user's user page now says it is a suspected sock of me. This witch hunt is getting quite tiresome. I was the one who demanded an investigation, remember? What is it going to take here?Mk5384 (talk) 12:37, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
 * User page deleted, however I do agree this is a obvious sock puppet and should not be unblocked. Brandon (talk) 17:17, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I find it a bit odd that itsd not the SPA of the person accused, but it's still blocked with out an investigation into whoes SPA it is. I would have thought that we should (and need to kn ow) who created this account and why.Slatersteven (talk) 13:52, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 * It's possible that it's a sock of a known sockmaster, and that the checkuser didn't want to comment on that based on the WP:DENY principle. It could be worthwhile to ask the checkuser about it. Just be aware he might not give you a satisfactory answer. Much of the checkuser data is privileged info. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 14:05, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Given the situation (I.E. this seems to have meant to look like Mk5384) seems to me to be just a bit to coincidental to be a random Sockmaster. It looks more like a black sockpuppet account created to look like user A so that another user can accuse user A of sockpuppetry (without possible knowing that its false).Slatersteven (talk) 14:43, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, and there are known puppetmasters who are famous for doing exactly that. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 15:15, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Is it eer puppet master or Master Puppeteer?  Speaking of anagrams, I see that Baseball Bugs is not without peers that are only letters rearranged. Briefly Verbose (talk) 23:08, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I can play this game too! Brandon (talk) 03:01, 30 April 2010 (UTC)