User talk:Ip658888x

This new account"

I note that the creation statement says that "' This User account was created by, and for the use of, persons who were formerly (until 2011/11/06) editing select [[Wikipedia:Main Page|English W..."

You cannot do that - it implies that multiple people will use the account, & given the message at User_talk:65.88.88.126 it would also be block evasion. - Sitush (talk) 21:56, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We did not see any restriction on group accounts. You are jumping the gun regarding block evasion.ip658888x (talk) 22:02, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOSHARE. - Sitush (talk) 22:09, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Will wait until we hear from an administrator on this.ip658888x (talk) 22:14, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It was an administrator who asked us to create an account anyway. ip658888x (talk) 22:15, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

{{ec} Sure, as only they can block. You admitted to working as a team a few days ago and this latest move merely highlights the likelihood of actual socking rather than meatpuppetry - how is anyone to know which of you is which? This is now a seemingly impossible situation, since even if you each create individual accounts there would appear to be a possibility that you would share your passwords etc if the situation demanded it. It might actually need a consensus of admin approval via ANI or something. - Sitush (talk) 22:19, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

as you are a party to the Jiddu Krishnamurti dispute, which is directly relevant to this account and its creation, it would probably be wiser not to overplay your hand by following me everywhere and commenting on everything i do or say. (WP:TROLL) ip658888x (talk) 18:02, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I am not trolling. Try some AGF, please, because the various accusations are starting to grate a little. I had your IPs watchlisted because of recent problems relating to them (apparently unconnected to you). From that I saw your message about this new account &, to be honest, thought that this farrago would all be sorted by my initial post here. It seems to me to be blindingly obvious that you cannot do what you propose. But, clearly, it is not obvious to you. That's the way it goes sometimes. - Sitush (talk) 18:27, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sharing of accounts is prohibited for copyright reasons. If there is more than one editor behind this they each need their own account. EdJohnston (talk) 06:15, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

pls advise as to the best way to resolve this. we have always edited as a team and there is no apparent way to prove (outside of declaring otherwise) that this not so. anymore than User:Sitush can prove that the selfsame account is not in fact used by multiple persons. would like to resolve this asap so we can concentrate on the Jiddu Krishnamurti dispute. thank you ip658888x (talk) 18:02, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have frankly disclosed here that more than one person are using this account. Unless you express willingness to create separate accounts, you will be blocked. This is 100% in accordance with Wikipedia copyright policy. We need every edit to be owned by one particular submitter who has the authority to release their personal work to the world under our usual license. Only the original creator has the authority to release work to Wikipedia. (You can't release someone else's work unless you go through the WP:OTRS system). If more than one person uses the account then individual edits can't be attributed to persons any more. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 20:15, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

understood. going through WP:OTRS seems a bit too much and will add further delay and more bureaucracy. creating more accounts is both a cumbersome and not necessarily honest solution since there is no objective way of verifying shared accounts. is it possible to do the following: restate the user page to assert that all edits (for Wikipedia policy purposes) are created by and credited to 1 person (who will also be taking responsibility for all previous related projects) with the non-Wikipedia-related "support" of others? i know this sounds legalistic but it will be honest. there are two reasons for this phrasing: one, we want to give credit to everyone's work. and two, it will probably be obvious to anyone who examines the logs that it would have been impossible for 1 person to have done the quantity and quality of work in the projects we undertook in the time it happened. a third reason is the Jiddu Krishnamurti-related dispute. in pursuing its resolution, i will be acting on behalf of not only this account, but also of the IP range mentioned in the user page. if i can do it this way it will be a big help. thanks ip658888x (talk) 20:44, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

addition: if the above proposal cannot happen, maybe a new single-user account can be created with a similar user page? i'm throwing around ideas. i want to be 100% legit and above board in this, as the first major order of business will be a rather complex complaint (re: Jiddu Krishnamurti) with multiple ANI reports involving multiple users. if that can't be done, i guess 3 accounts will have to be created which seems like a waste. thank you. ip658888x (talk) 21:04, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It sounds like you will need to create three accounts. That should not be too burdensome. If you try to release edits on someone else's behalf, you need a signed statement from them which can be verified through OTRS. That would take you much more time. EdJohnston (talk) 21:44, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]