User talk:B2bomber81

Welcome!

Hello, B2bomber81, and

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a

At least he's gone for now with that user name. I wouldn't be surprised to see a sock popup eventually though. Oh well, thanks for the help. --Onorem 17:07, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah...that page is getting pretty tough to read. I'm guessing there's a standard way to archive article talk pages. I'll look into when I've got a little time later today, unless you feel like doing it. --Onorem 18:12, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oops...completely forgot I was gonna make that move until I checked the page this morning. Thanks for taking care of it. --Onorem 14:23, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that, all I saw was a user deleting a complete section for no reason that was apparent to me so I reverted it. I was using VandalProof at the time. I honestly do not know nor care whether about this certain issue (other than having a hate for Best Buy but that's besides the point).

Actually, I deleted a paragraph - not a whole section. Apology accepted though. B2bomber81 04:44, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any comments to add to Talk:Christmas controversies/Merge proposal? I am interested in why it is a good or a bad idea, and changes to the proposal. I'm not seeing why any specific retailer should get its own special "No Christmas" paragraph or section. Regards, Tuxide 22:07, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response, but it is not spam because I am only asking you. I am asking you personally because you seem to have a strong interest in the topic. I also don't want this to turn into an edit war between you and User:24.218.124.62, which is why you should have a third person involved in your discussion. Regards, Tuxide 22:23, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not to be rude, but frankly, I don't really care what happens on any of the other articles at this moment. Instead of getting involved with editing hundreds of other articles, I'm concentrating my efforts on just a few retail pages that all seem to be quite similar in nature, but seem to be magnets for trolls recently. This particular issue (No Christmas) has been a troll magnet in itself really. Most of the people that want to put this in, want it written in such a way that it slanders the company, and usually it's some fly-by-night user that doesn't want to register, has never edited anything else on wikipedia and keeps coming on under different IP addresses. This is one reason why I think editing should be reserved for registered users only. It keeps the trolls out.B2bomber81 22:34, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have no reason to assume bad faith in either of you yet, so I'm going to sit back and watch this a while longer. I am a bit concerned about

Wal-Mart). As for myself, I tend to focus on Target Corporation. Regards, Tuxide 23:00, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

Thank you, and I will consider looking into it. And as far as the current thread on the Best Buy talk page, I'm hoping that my latest proposition will end it. At least for now anyway. B2bomber81 23:33, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Of course it is up to the moderators to decide the fate of your application, but they likely will reject it, because you have done only 98 mainspace edits, and the required minimum is 250 ;-). Bye and Happy Editing by Snowolf^(talk) on 23:13, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear B2bomber81,

Thank you for applying for

I have further refactored the discussion on

Unfortunately, no I don't. I suppose we can mark his user page as {{sockpuppet}} and see how he reacts. Regards, Tuxide 06:43, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is assumed that B2bomber81 is the one who is throwing out baseless allegations of multiple accounts on this page as well as on an unrelated Best Buy page. We assume he is the one responsible for harrassment and marking up other user's wikipages. So with that said. I don't think this discussion should be used for silly tit for tat. I suggest removal of user to user speech in this forum immediately. If I have no objections I will clean up the above post and this one so that the topic of discussion may be more focused and coherent for the wikipedia community. --Memejojo 17:27, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

The reaction to making accusations and harrassing another user has been noted. I am therefore imposing a 24 hour cooling off period that refrains you from further making inflamatory and biased remarks directed toward other wikipedia users. It is not in the community nor your best interests to continue making accusations and stirring up trouble with other users. I have reported this user to a third party for oversight and enforcement of the cooling off period. I hope this is the first of the few last steps necessary to stop the intentional harrassment. Thanks and good luck. --Memejojo 23:37, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please be reminded, Memejojo, that only

cooling off periods. Aecis^Brievenbus 23:57, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

Yes I have run through appropriate channels and this is the first step which shows my good faith in dealing with this user's continued harrassment. At the request of associate editor Consumed_Crustacean I have placed the above referenced notice on the Incidents noticeboard so that the brouder community may monitor the situation. It is assume that will be forum to resolve the harrassment dispute during and after the 24 hour cooling off period. --Memejojo 00:03, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know the link to the preferred article is dead, but do you have any reason to believe that Landerman56 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is the same person? (given the only edit he has made) Tuxide 21:44, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really know. It's hard to tell by that one contribution so far. Let's see if he/she has any comments about my revert of the change. The link was indeed broken, but I reverted back to the last version, and fixed the link. Thanks Tuxide. B2bomber81 01:33, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

After this edit I am now convinced that it is our friend. I am adding the suspected sock puppet template to his talk page. Tuxide 02:13, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I would definitely agree with your assessment on that. Looking at the history for his talk page, it's actually quite evident that it is the same person as momoj. B2bomber81 02:36, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Very interesting discussion you two are having about me here. Yes I do know Memjojo. He is my brother so no I am not a sockpuppet of him so you may relax. I am solely responsible for the edit to the Best Buy page that you seem concerned about. The article is well vetted and sourced so I'm afraid the two of you will have to live with reality.

Apparently the apple doesn't fall too far from the tree then - you don't know how to sign your posts either. Actually, I don't believe that you are anyone other than the user Memjojo. It's quite obvious that you are a sockpuppet, and if you continue with you usual antics on Wikipedia, your Landerman56 account will be blocked just like all of your other accounts. B2bomber81 15:24, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at the beef you have with Memejojo and knowing him personally I can see that your beef is not legit as his contributions are still valid and available and you have no control or need to delete them. I contend he wins you lose. Sorry to inform you. If it's needed I will get another account. I can tell you that memejojo has already gotten another one so labeling me a sockpuppet is indeed fruitless. --Landerman56 21:20, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MJ tells me that it's not worth talking to you or Tuxide because he thinks both of you are not very intellectual and only see this as a game of egos or the like. I have to agree given the fact that his contributions to wikipedia are fine from what I see and from what other users think since they have been vetted. I can appreciate the ego you must have to "protect" certain pages but I will no longer participate in the "debate." If it takes creating a new account for myself then fine. I just don't have the time to defend baseless attacks. Find someone else to argue with. I have a life, job etc to attend to. --Landerman56 21:32, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Landerman56/Welcome ♠Landerman56 (@)(Contribs)(Sign!) 01:56, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He just totally removed a new entry on the Geek Squad wikipedia entry. It referenced the recent incident of a Geek Squad'er on a service call covertly recording a 13 year old girl nude. The article was on Foxnews.com and other news sources and is correct. He needs to be banned. —The preceding

Thank you for your input, Mr. Anonymous. However, I don't appreciate your threatening comments left both on this page, and in your entry on the Geek Squad page. Why don't you sign up for an account like the rest of us. I suggest you learn a little courtesy and some manners before you return to Wikipedia. B2bomber81 21:34, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I never threatened, don't threaten me, got it? Chill. As I explained before, you cannot simply remove facts. if you didn't like where they were placed, you should have placed them on the page elsewhere, not simply removing it.

I would appreciate your co-operation with regards to improving the James Watson article, and the stubborn refusal of Landerman to allow edits of the topic until he see's fit. Thankyou.--Koncorde (talk) 22:55, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current