User talk:Seb az86556/archive46

Request for Arbitration declined
This is a courtesy notice that a request for arbitration, which named you as a party, has been declined. Feel free to see the Arbitrators' opinions for potential suggestions on moving forward.

For the Arbitration Committee, -- Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 02:28, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

rv of dcfldd
Hi,

You've reverted and edit by Truedown1 to dcfldd, and I don't understand why. The edit was to add a valid and useful category to the article and remove the uncategorised maintenance template.

Can you explain your reasoning?

—me_and 10:13, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
 * 3 categories added were defamation, 5 more samples were useless. So I blanket-reverted everything. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 10:15, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Strangesad thinks we are the same person and even ran a little test on us
Hello - thought you might be amused to see this. I thought it was pretty funny. Smeat75 (talk) 03:17, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Edit wars/Usercheck
You have recently warned a user because of his participation in edit wars. He seems to be carrying on. I won't give his name here because I assume him to be a reincarnation of a banned user. Where can I ask for a checkuser - or whatever it is called - to see, if the two are one person? -- Zz (talk) 14:14, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
 * WP:SPI. Or go to User: Elockid directly, he may do it. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 20:48, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks -- Zz (talk) 15:06, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

AN/I report
(can't email you - dang! :) )

Hi there. I just saw, and removed your ANI report just there. Folks know about it and we're working away on the issue. Thanks for reporting! - A l is o n  ❤ 06:37, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Notice of WP:AN discussion
Hello Seb, this is notification of a WP:AN discussion regarding an editor you have dealt with. The thread is: WP:AN. Appreciate your input, thanks! 18:11, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

BLP (or not)
Re: Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents, I could very well be in the minority :-) It just seems like some liberties are justified when discussing potential sources that may improve the article. At any rate, I dont condone the user's warring to reinsert material without first discussing the BLP concerns and getting consensus to re-add.  Cheers.—Bagumba (talk) 20:12, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I know. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 20:14, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Am I really out of line
in wanting Cherokee sources for Cherokee legends? Or at least reports of Cherokee sources? It's so easy to call something a legend that really is nothing of the kind. Dougweller (talk) 20:42, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
 * you are completely in line. Of course if it needs to be in there, it needs to be sourced; I was doubting whether it had any place at all. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 23:11, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks. We are still going around in circles at Talk:Moon-eyed people and Til is accusing me of censoring Cherokee legends elsewhere. Trivial in comparison with his attack on me and DBachmman that almost got him blocked, if you missed it, but annoying. Dougweller (talk) 10:55, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

How CU works
When I run a check on an account, the CU tool gives me all IPs used by the person operating it. I can then check each IP individually (or an entire IP range) and I can see all accounts that have edited from said IP. That's useful when looking for sleepers, for instance. I have not reviewed the CU log, but, from my experience with the tool, I'd say that DQ was checking someone who happened to edit from the same IP (or IP range) as Riley or Gwickwire, saw something suspicious and decided to investigate. It's not that rare to see many unrelated accounts when checking heavily used IPs... Salvio Let's talk about it! 09:19, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
 * That explains it, thanks. I think others will find this explanation useful as well. You might wanna post that to ANI. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 09:22, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
 * You're right; posted on ANI as well. Cheers. Salvio  Let's talk about it! 09:31, 30 April 2013 (UTC)