User talk:Jersmum

Sockpuppetry case
You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Suspected sock puppets/Zeq for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. RolandR (talk) 22:19, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

FYI
You are a named party in an abritration case. Lawrence Cohen §  t / e  16:49, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry accusation
Did you write an email at 9.49 on 23 March stating "I edited an article about Paul McKenna. I found a slight grammatical error and fixed it. I also updated information on his US television appearances. There was a place where I indicated that it was a minor change and then a box where I described the changes I made"? If you did, this confirms that you were indeed operating as part of an organised external intervention into Wikipedia, under the direction of people who have been blocked from editing for controlling sockpuppets.

This email describes exactly your own editing pattern at 02.40(UTC) on 24 March; it would be an incredible coincidence if another person made this claim within ten minutes of your edit. I am not quoting the name and email address from which the email appears to have been sent, but I assume you have seen the documents. Do you want to argue that this is not you, but a deliberate forgery intended to incriminate you?

I see no reason to withdraw the accusation of sockpuppetry.

And what did you mean by "One down and 99 more to go"? RolandR (talk) 14:51, 24 April 2008 (UTC)


 * By the way, when you leave comments on a talk page, you should sign them by typing four tildes -- the ~ character on your keyboard. This will automatically add your user name and the time of the message, making it easier for others to reply. RolandR (talk) 14:54, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/CAMERA lobbying
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Requests for arbitration/CAMERA lobbying/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Requests for arbitration/CAMERA lobbying/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, — Rlevse  •  Talk  • 22:50, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Final decision in CAMERA lobbying arbitration case
This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. Mere membership by an editor in some external group that has been involved in violations of policy is not actionable without evidence that the editor has some personal involvement in said violations. Sanctions previously imposed are confirmed. An amnesty is extended towards any editors who may have been involved in this external group and who have not been sanctioned for their participation in it. This is coupled with an expectation that these editors will not participate in similar efforts in the future. Members of the community who may have information regarding similar efforts by external groups to unduly influence our content are urged to forward that information to the Committee for review. is admonished to maintain an appropriate level of professionalism at all times, and to avoid misrepresenting Wikipedia policy to other editors. For the committee, — Rlevse  •  Talk  • 20:19, 28 May 2008 (UTC)