IP108VA
 | This user is new to Wikipedia. Please assume good faith, remain civil, and be calm, patient, helpful, and polite while they become accustomed to Wikipedia and its intricacies. |
- or he'll kick your ass!
- or he'll kick your ass!
Welcome IP108VA!
| Some pages of helpful information to get you started: | Some common sense Do's and Don'ts:
|
| If you need further help, you can: | or even: |
Alternatively, leave me a message at my talk page or type {{helpme}} here on your talk page, and someone will try to help.
There are many ways you can contribute to Wikipedia. Here are a few ideas:
|
Remember to always sign your posts on talk pages. You can do this either by clicking on the 
button on the edit toolbar or by typing four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your post. This will automatically insert your signature, a link to this (your talk) page, and a timestamp.
To get some practice editing you can use a sandbox. You can create your own private sandbox for use any time. Perfect for working on bigger projects. Then for easy access in the future, you can put
{{My sandbox}} on your user page. By the way, seeing as you haven't created a user page yet, simply click here to start it.July 2013 edit
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one of your recent edits to Ardenne Abbey has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.
- ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
- For help, take a look at the introduction.
- The following is the log entry regarding this message: Ardenne Abbey was changed by IP108VA (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.879194 on 2013-07-09T01:58:23+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 01:58, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Ardenne Abbey murders (WWII) edit
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Ardenne Abbey murders (WWII) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://thenormandycrusade.com/page/2/. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. reddogsix (talk) 03:17, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
You and your IP edit
Don't you think it would be better if you logged in every time you edit rather than using 108.45.72.196 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)? I'm not accusing you of doing anything wrong, but it would help in terms of accountability, particularly given that you've been active in some rather high-profile forums.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:42, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
- It certainly would be more convenient for me, I grant you that. As far as I know, IP editors are just as accountable for their edits as named account editors are. In fact, editing from my IP address has prevented me, more than once, from editing controversial pages where I might have gotten myself in trouble (luckily, they were semi-protected, so I didn't edit them). So, hay ventajas y desventajas, as they say. --IP108VA (talk) 23:07, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
- I'd go with convenience. IP editors are NOT just as accountable because they can be used by different individuals. Also, it helps to edit with just one account unless there is a legitimate reason to use an alternative account and that account is disclosed. I'm sure you can exercise self-control if you edit with just your registered account. You don't need a gimmick like being unconfirmed to prevent you from doing damage.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:15, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
- I am as accountable because I'm the only one using my 108... IP address. The only reason I created IP108VA was to upload some pictures. It's also necessary for commenting at RFAs. Maybe you can convince me by explaining the disadvantages to me personally (besides a little minor inconvenience) of editing from my IP address. --IP108VA (talk) 02:14, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
- WP:ILLEGIT is a non-exhaustive list of the illegitimate uses of an alternative account. WP:SOCK#LEGIT lists the legitimate uses of an alternative account with the qualifier: " If you use an alternative account, it is your responsibility to ensure that you do not violate [the sock puppet] policy." The policy "recommend[s]" that you disclose the alternative accounts. You could do that on your registered account user page. User pages for IPs are rare, but you could disclose it on the talk page if you wished, particularly if, as you say, the 108 address appears to "belong" to you "permanently". The policy does not require you to disclose; nor does it prohibit the use of more than one account. I personally wish it did, but I'd have to go through a whole big rigamarole to do so, and it's not clear there would be a consensus for the change anyway (so hard to get a consensus on these things). That said - and here's where we finally get to your quasi challenge - editors and administrators like me will be suspicious of you. If a problem arises - even if it is accidental - say you revert on an article using both accounts so that one could accuse you of sock edit warring, the burden will be on you to satisfy others that you should not be classified as a sock. Also, your rationale for having the two accounts isn't one listed on the policy page, and it strikes me as weak at best. At least, if you disclosed, you would appear to be more forthcoming, and some people might be less suspicious. (The policy, btw, assumes that both accounts are registered. I don't think it addresses your situation precisely. However, editing while logged out can be considered socking. It's listed in the lead.)--Bbb23 (talk) 13:26, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
- I am as accountable because I'm the only one using my 108... IP address. The only reason I created IP108VA was to upload some pictures. It's also necessary for commenting at RFAs. Maybe you can convince me by explaining the disadvantages to me personally (besides a little minor inconvenience) of editing from my IP address. --IP108VA (talk) 02:14, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
- I'd go with convenience. IP editors are NOT just as accountable because they can be used by different individuals. Also, it helps to edit with just one account unless there is a legitimate reason to use an alternative account and that account is disclosed. I'm sure you can exercise self-control if you edit with just your registered account. You don't need a gimmick like being unconfirmed to prevent you from doing damage.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:15, 10 August 2013 (UTC)