User talk:Jupitale

OI! Would you PLEASE stop deleting every page you see? 42.book.addict (talk) 18:23, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

I suspect they won't. The individual behind this account is clearly one of those people with nothing better to do than institute minor and ultimately pointless chaos. They're a bore, and won't suddenly change their ways just because someone asks nicely.

OH YES I FUCKING WILL, I am now in a war with a user who you will have to check my edit history to find out citation needed {{citation needed^{[citation needed]}}} -- Jupitale (talk) 16:32, 11 March 2024 (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

I have no problem with you, if you're actually going to turn over a new leaf.

If you're happy to do so, though, there's several things your recent edits have highlighted:

• You really need to ~~~~ your Talk-page edits, if only for the useful timestamp.
• Unless invited, I suggest you stick to User Talk comments, not someone else's User page (that's for them to write on, really, notwithstanding setting the page up).
• The template you mean below is {{Actual citation needed}}, if you're serious about using it.
• "Lorem ipsum" is actually rooted in a source slightly more than a century old (well, more than that, if you count it being Latin, but the exact subset of words is at least back to just before WW1), but the true origin seemingly lost in the mists of time. Some typsetting/printers' guild definitely knows/knew more, even than wikipedia...
• You link to full URLs with [<URL> text for link], but internalised wikilinks with [[<Page Name or wikimedia link>|text for link]], with {{w|<Wiktionary article title>|text for link}} and other templates available to 'nicify' the markup. (You can omit the space-/pipe-and-"text for link"-bit, but it's always useful, especially as the [<URL>] link becomes a reference-superscript without the space-and-text.) I think you actually know some of this, but as you said you didn't know, elsewhere, I'm happy to fill you in on the basics, as well as anyone else who needs to know. And the Preview button is your friend, if you're initially unsure if it'll work properly or not/want to check that it does.

Anyway, if you're happy to be productive, and aren't deliberately sockpuppeting with the aim of creating more of the same chaos (I'll reserve my judgement, not that my personal opinion is sought), then I unofficially welcome you to the clan of honest editors. I'm sure you could keep your nose clean, but that's not something the rest of us can yet be sure of. And of course we know that you can create more sockpuppets, this is something we have to accept and work around if it happens, as always. (It's not like it's even a challenge, so I hope you don't expect to be seen as clever if you try that.) So a tentative welcome into the fold, and let's see how if you can live up to it, hey? 172.70.90.49 16:57, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

You should make a wiki page for Sockpuppeting and put my old accound (jupitah) on there, Just make a list of all sockpuppeters that have actual text on pages instead of just crapcrapcrapcrapcrapcrapcrapcrap...

They are also almost certainly a long-time troll of this place. Maybe a copycat of prior spates of trolling, but they exhibit a number of previously seen usage fingerprints beyond the mere vandalism content itself so it's likely this isn't their first rodeo (or that this is the only bronco that they're currently sitting on).

Whether they'll use this page to reply, I can't tell. Probably they'll be tempted to just wipe it/repurpose it, though. 172.70.85.41

do you have a citation for any of those Template:real citation needed{{citation needed} (c) (r) (tm)Jupitale (talk) 15:47, 11 March 2024 (UTC)