User talk:Factchecker atyourservice

well OK then!

User:Sandstein Factchecker_atyourservice violates their topic ban by making this request because it concerns a dispute that bears on US politics.

That is absurdly coy phrasing of my application requesting the striking of comments that 100% mischaracterized my conduct in a dispute from TEN YEARS AGO. Your comments make it sound like I am trying to further an actual dispute. But hey, it sure is disruptive to ask for false claims in an official forum to be stricken. Factchecker_atyourservice 15:57, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is if you are banned from the topic area. Sandstein 16:59, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Sandstein: that's rich—if I go to ANI to get the AE record corrected after my topic ban expires, someone will say I'm trying to "dredge up old disputes" and I'll just be re-topic-banned. Factchecker_atyourservice 01:25, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Quite possibly. Therefore I advise you to just ignore this matter. People say wrong things on the Internet and on Wikipedia all the time; it is not worth your and certainly not everybody else's time to try to dispute this issue. Sandstein 07:06, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Sandstein: Has your interpretation of WP:BANEX in this circumstance ever been commented on by the community? Because, I'd have disagreed and I'm wondering how loose intended that policy was meant to be.--v/r - T P 14:30, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Since this is the first time I've encountered this circumstance - no, not to my knowledge. Sandstein 15:19, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If these circumstances happen again, would you mind pinging me? I'd like to talk about it next time.--v/r - T P 15:50, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Factchecker atyourservice. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Call for discussion

In 2014 you initiated an AFD on Thomas Jackson, the Chief of Police of Ferguson - ^{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomas Jackson (police officer)} Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomas Jackson (police officer) (2nd nomination).

In 2017 Jackson published a book on the killing.[1][2] [3]

I think the book erodes any BLP1E concern.

On the third anniversary of the shooting NPR interviewed Jackson [4], and he was interviewed by several other venues [5], [6] [7] [8] [9]

So, what is your advice on his notability in 2020?

It was 6 years ago, and you are entitled to tell me your interest in Jackson, in Brown, in Ferguson, is exhausted, and you have no interest in looking at those links, and re-evaluating Jackson's notability. If you don't reply to this note I will assume that is your position. But, since you were a primary challenger to his notability in 2014 I thought I would ask you today.

I am going to ping Sandstein, the administrator who closed the AFD, and RockMFR and Tone, the nominator and closer of the first AFD.

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 13:39, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Geo Swan, if my eyes aren't playing tricks on me, the link you provided for the AfD shows RockMFR as the nom. I don't even see Fact Checker's name in the discussion. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 13:49, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Geo Swan (talk) 13:53, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I was curious to see how WP reported that incident and found Shooting of Michael Brown#Aftermath, which includes the police chief's apology and resignation 5 mos after the incident. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 14:12, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I don't see the coverage, within Shooting of Michael Brown as adequate. There is no mention of his 2017 book or extensive series of appearances as a guest on National TV. If there were, it would be off-topic. Geo Swan (talk) 15:56, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Geo Swan, I have no interest in the topic, and therefore no opinion, sorry. Sandstein 15:59, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with creating an article for this subject. — RockMFR 03:36, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

You are mentioned here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Darryl.jensen/Archive Snooganssnoogans (talk) 18:23, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

You have been mentioned here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Darryl.jensen Snooganssnoogans (talk) 23:21, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]