User talk:Dog Whipper

In response to your feedback[edit]

Hi Dog Whipper, and thank you for your feedback. As far as I can tell, you haven't actually had any interaction with other editors - you have only one (unreverted) edit in your edit history, and this post is the first message to arrive on your talkpage. Have you perhaps edited Wikipedia previously under a different account?

Yunshui 雲‍水 09:45, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I created this account because I had bad editor experiences in the past. In general, there seems to be the notion prevailing that editors who edit under their IP address are somehow beyond the pale. I anyone can edit, then even an IP is someone. --Dog Whipper (talk) 14:28, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dog Whipper! Drop by the Teahouse anytime![edit]

Hello! Dog Whipper, you are invited to join other new editors and friendly hosts in the Teahouse. An awesome place to meet people, ask questions and learn more about Wikipedia. Please join us! Sarah (talk) 05:52, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notable?[edit]

Your "Le gang des Estoniens" is a bit of a stretch. I did clean it up, there's no indication that actual Estonians, per your Wikilink to the people of that ethnic group, are involved, only the EUROPOL statement that the criminal organization is based in Estonia. Probably merits deletion. Nor is Estonia particularly a crime hub (per one of your other recent contributions). You might find a warmer reception to content which promotes knowledge and understanding. If you're here to contribute content to make Estonians out to be thieves and thugs, any "bad editor experiences" you've had in the past will surely repeat, not through anyone else's fault but your own. Welcome back whoever you used to be. VєсrumЬа ►TALK 16:43, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your effort. Firstly, with Estonians I mean citizens of that country as is the commonly accepted practice here, I believe. If you think the article should go away, you may take the necessary steps. Secondly, Estonia is not a crime hub by itself but in combination with other countries in the region, says Europol - not me! You possibly mix up ethnicity, nationality, and geography, here. Thirdly, I am somewhat puzzled how you come to the impression I would oppose promotion of "knowledge and understanding". To the contrary, I would think you are about to suppress information which might make some people you care about look bad. This is exactly the "bad editor's experience" I was talking about - not been taken seriously but being considered a nuisance and a fraud. Thank you very much, --Dog Whipper (talk) 18:55, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately you Wiki-linked to Estonians, the Finno-Ugric ethnic group, in the content you created, clearly not "citizens of Estonia"—and even that is not a given as the actual Europol release stated they were members of an "Estonian-based criminal organization." None of those three are equivalent. It appears to me that it is you (not me) who have possibly mixed up ethnicity (your original Wikilink), nationality (your indicating you meant citizens not ethnic group), and geography (Europol's indication of "Estonia-based"). This is exactly the sort of scenario that can lead you to a "bad editor's experience" were you to run into a WP:BUZZSAW of impatient and intolerant editors.

This conversation does have a feeling of déjà vu. You've gone for a fresh start so I won't ask if we've crossed paths before. Best, VєсrumЬа ►TALK 01:55, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Slowly I start to understand what your problem is. Well, it seems to be a common enough mistake to make. So I am still puzzled about the importance you give to such an oversight. It is confusing enough that the common usage of the word for citizens of a country leads to an article about an ethnic group. But, it is not at all helpful to get emotional and argue ad hominem rather than follow WP:Netiquette. Have you considered cutting back on the java? It might cause anxiety and irritability, it says [Health_effects_of_coffee#Anxiety_and_sleep_changes|here]]. --Dog Whipper (talk) 05:44, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please fill out our brief Teahouse survey![edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedian, the hardworking hosts and staff at Wikipedia:Teahouse would like your feedback! We have created a brief survey meant to help us better understand the experience of new editors on Wikipedia. You are being selected to participate in our survey because you either received an invitation to visit the Teahouse, or edited the Teahouse Questions or Guests page.

Click here to be taken to the survey site.

The survey should take less than 10 minutes to complete. We really appreciate your feedback, and we look forward to your next vist to the Teahouse!

Happy editing,

J-Mo, Teahouse host, 15:24, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Message sent with Global message delivery.

Sockpuppetry case[edit]

Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dodo19 for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 21:04, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sock puppet[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet. --MuZemike 18:18, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but please read our guide to appealing blocks first.