User talk:Indépendance des Chercheurs

Welcome
Welcome!

Hello, Indépendance des Chercheurs, 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 Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! Drmies (talk) 20:37, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Manual of Style

May 2011
Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Luis González-Mestres, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 23:18, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Please stop. Continuing to remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Luis González-Mestres, without resolving the problem that the template refers to may be considered disruptive editing. Further edits of this type may result in your being blocked from editing Wikipedia. Drmies (talk) 23:33, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

ANI thread
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 23:46, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively. In particular, the three-revert rule states that: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Kevin (talk) 01:09, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

FYI
Please see Articles for deletion/Superbradyon (2nd nomination). Drmies (talk) 02:20, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Edit warring at Luis González-Mestres
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. The complete report of this case is at WP:AN3. EdJohnston (talk) 04:48, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry
Please see Wikipedia's policies on sockpuppetry. It is not allowed to edit while logged out, pretending to be someone else, as you appear to have done here. This is especially true when your own account has been blocked. Please do not edit Wikipedia until your block runs out or is lifted. Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:33, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
 * A large set of IPs from is now editing at Articles for deletion/Superbradyon (2nd nomination) since your block. These IPs are presumably you. Your block is extended by another week for evasion. EdJohnston (talk) 17:39, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Obviously, there is no real debate here, and people are blocked when they bring arguments. Indépendance des Chercheurs is well-known in an institution like CNRS and is not a person but a collective. A sizeable amount of researches vote for them, and most of these researchers are not members of the collective. And what about the conflicts of interests of the (often anonymous) Wikipedia administrators ?

IP adresses are blocked just on the grounds of suspicion. The end of the text quoted above is :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ind%C3%A9pendance_des_Chercheurs

A large set of IPs from 83.199.0.0/16 (block user · block log · WHOIS) is now editing at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Superbradyon (2nd nomination) since your block. These IPs are presumably you. Your block is extended by another week for evasion. EdJohnston (talk) 17:39, 15 May 2011 (UTC)(end of quote)

As I stressed, this is by based in pure suspicion arguments. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Indépendance des Chercheurs (talk • contribs)
 * Like in the natural sciences, we work by inductive reasoning and we're doing the best we can. What helps our identification is that all of those IPs say exactly the same thing you're saying, with the exact same mannerisms in coding, in exactly the same kind of language. We may not be rocket scientists, but we have a test: The duck test. Good day. Drmies (talk) 03:26, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Shared account
You seem to have implied above that more than one person is editing from this account. Is this true? If so, please see WP:NOSHARE. It explains that shared accounts are forbidden on Wikipedia. If that's what's going on here, each person using this account will have to get an account of his own or just be content to edit as an IP. Thank you for your kind attention. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 02:55, 16 May 2011 (UTC)