User talk:Hound and Feline: Difference between revisions

Line 7: Line 7:

:::Yes, per [[WP:MEATPUPPET]]. {{tqb|A new user who engages in the same behavior as another user in the same context, and who appears to be editing Wikipedia solely for that purpose, may be subject to the remedies applied to the user whose behavior they are joining.}} I’ve reverted the edits, please don’t restore them again. [[User:Belbury|Belbury]] ([[User talk:Belbury|talk]]) 07:44, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

::::I wont, but I noticed one thing, the pages just gopt worse when you copied the same revert tactic of some ip who reverted it before, dont you think wronging a random user is not as important as an articles accuracy and quality of sources? Its not only about wronging someone, but thousands of people will read the articles and miss out, or be feed unsourced information If instead of checking the articles yourself, you just mindlessly revert something an ip reverted before. I left a message on your talk page, because this is definetly bad behavior that damages wikipedia. [[User:Hound and Feline|Hound and Feline]] ([[User talk:Hound and Feline#top|talk]]) 07:53, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

::::From now on, alölmy contributions will be on talk pages then, I will debate anyone If I deem something as inaccurate [[User:Hound and Feline|Hound and Feline]] ([[User talk:Hound and Feline#top|talk]]) 07:57, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

:How about you take a look at these pages and judge them? [[User:Hound and Feline|Hound and Feline]] ([[User talk:Hound and Feline#top|talk]]) 07:40, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Hound and Feline, welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. Your editing pattern indicates that you may be using multiple accounts or coordinating editing with people outside Wikipedia, such as Grasshalm (talk · contribs). Our policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow this, and users who misuse multiple accounts may be blocked from editing. If you operate multiple accounts directly or with the help of another person, please disclose these connections. Thank you. Belbury (talk) 07:33, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

One of my friends told me to look at these pages, as the reverts didnt make them better, so that person who told me must have been a banned user now? AT the end of the day Its pretty irrelevant, we should look at the edits themselves and If they improved the page, not who made them. Hound and Feline (talk) 07:37, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is someone asking me to take a look at these pages not allowed or what? Hound and Feline (talk) 07:38, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, per WP:MEATPUPPET.

A new user who engages in the same behavior as another user in the same context, and who appears to be editing Wikipedia solely for that purpose, may be subject to the remedies applied to the user whose behavior they are joining.

I’ve reverted the edits, please don’t restore them again. Belbury (talk) 07:44, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I wont, but I noticed one thing, the pages just gopt worse when you copied the same revert tactic of some ip who reverted it before, dont you think wronging a random user is not as important as an articles accuracy and quality of sources? Its not only about wronging someone, but thousands of people will read the articles and miss out, or be feed unsourced information If instead of checking the articles yourself, you just mindlessly revert something an ip reverted before. I left a message on your talk page, because this is definetly bad behavior that damages wikipedia. Hound and Feline (talk) 07:53, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

From now on, alölmy contributions will be on talk pages then, I will debate anyone If I deem something as inaccurate Hound and Feline (talk) 07:57, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about you take a look at these pages and judge them? Hound and Feline (talk) 07:40, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Must Read

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply