| Revision as of 13:34, 21 August 2010 editMachine Elf 1735 (talk | contribs)7,245 edits →Regarding Machine Elf 1735: ping← Previous edit | Revision as of 14:21, 21 August 2010 edit undoMachine Elf 1735 (talk | contribs)7,245 edits →Regarding Machine Elf 1735: thxNext edit → | ||
| Line 167: | Line 167: | ||
| I found three ''non–consecutive'' reversals within a 24 hour period. Has the prior ] completely shut down? Do I need to start a new one?—] (]) 13:34, 21 August 2010 (UTC) | I found three ''non–consecutive'' reversals within a 24 hour period. Has the prior ] completely shut down? Do I need to start a new one?—] (]) 13:34, 21 August 2010 (UTC) | ||
| :I'm not going to work on the articles ever again. See the ] thread... | |||
| :Four, I don't have. Thank you.—] (]) 14:21, 21 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ---- | ---- | ||
| A few things that might be relevant if I may comment: | A few things that might be relevant if I may comment: | ||
Revision as of 14:21, 21 August 2010
Seth Material
Hey, Ed! I recently noticed that a certain "someone" has been posting "A-S-S-H-O-L-E" to a number of user pages, and I have reverted a few, including the one on your page. Both 72.82.11.120 and 71.161.228.4 seem to be in Rhode Island - not a big place. Any hunches who this might be? I'd love to look into it - e-mail me if you wish. Cheers :> Doc9871 (talk) 10:27, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
- If this is an IP from Rhode Island who is hostile to both me and 2over0, it is most likely User:Caleb Murdock. He is indignant that the Seth Material article was taken away from his preferred version, which a number of people felt was not neutral. It does not appear that a rangeblock would do much good; we need to hope that he gets bored with vandalism eventually. EdJohnston (talk) 13:53, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
- Hostile to you, 2over0, Verbal, Guyonthesubway, Bongwarrior... etc. I tagged the IP's mentioned above, plus a few that were missed. I'm pretty sure there will be more... Doc9871 (talk) 23:33, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
- The Seth Material article was perfectly neutral. It simply laid out the tenets of the material in a logical way, which is what people would want to read if they were looking for the article. The bias was on the part of the editors who attacked it: Verbal and Brangifer, two self-appointed censors who are trying to shape the encyclopedia to their beliefs. Your role is that you back up the self-appointed censors (in my opinion, vandals who work from within). It doesn't seem to matter to you that Misplaced Pages is crawling with censors, deletionists and other control freaks who can't stand to see a bit of information in the encyclopedia that they don't like.
- You may think that it's pathetic that my anger keeps bringing me back to harass you, but what is more pathetic is to spend 8 hours a days editing Misplaced Pages, especially when your efforts do nothing to improve the encyclopedia. Editors like Verbal and Brangifer are bad enough, but the people who are really doing the damage are the administrators who facilitate their destructive activity. Your whole involvement with Misplaced Pages is a waste of time and effort.--Caleb Murdock —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.103.156.119 (talk) 17:03, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
- I really wish I understood why you are so dense that you can't see what is happening. New editors come to Misplaced Pages to share their knowledge on the subjects that interest them, only to find themselves in pitched battles with editors who are intent on erasing what they have written. The attackers are always Misplaced Pages addicts who, pathetically, have nothing to do but spend hours on the site each day. Having spent so much time on the site, they invariably believe that their views are more important than other editors' views. And since they know the rules so well, they always win their battles. The knowledgeable editors get kicked off by idiots like you, and the articles get cut down or deleted, and the encyclopedia suffers.
- Verbal is a conservative Christian who feels threatened by alternative religious theories, and who seems to think that a good article is the size of a homeopathy treatment (except for the articles he likes, of course). Brangifer is an atheist who also feels threatened by emergent religious theories. These are not unbiased individuals. Yet because you are only focused on disciplining editors who haven't learned how to kiss ass, you keep backing them up. THEY ARE NOT DOING ANY GOOD FOR THIS ENCYCLOPEDIA. YOU ARE NOT DOING ANY GOOD FOR THIS ENCYCLOPEDIA. BY BACKING UP EDITORS LIKE THAT, YOU ARE HURTING THE ENCYCLOPEDIA.
- You had better protect your page again, because you will no longer be able to block my posts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.103.156.194 (talk) 5:55, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
How to file a CheckUser request? Can you help?
Ok. I've discovered YET another Corticopia account. Edit pattern consistent (including POV pushing in topics about Turkey, Georgia, Cyprus , Mexico, Central America and "the Americas" in general). Recent creation within the last 9 months, which suggest that this account has been used along with others (such as Superluminary, his most recent registered account).
I think that filing a CheckUser would be the best and I think you can help since you're more experiencied dealing with this complex cases. I have all the IPs he's been recently using (the ones I've discovered so far) such as 76.68.80.199 which already engaged in edit wars. The most indcredibly hypocritical behaviour is that in his talk page he tells another administrator that he "didn't know about leaving references" that he is still new. Incredible!
He has not created a visible problem such an edit war (yet) in the articles I edit, so probably I'll keep an eye on it. Or what do you think? He has already introduced a false statement here . And is adding deliberately false information, just waiting for somebody to notice it for correction . Also he's reverting my edits, deleting a map of plate tectonics (and the section is talking about plate tectonics!) just because that will clarify his lies.
Thanks for your answers in advance. AlexCovarrubias 15:09, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
- Ok Ed, now I think the CheckUser is a must. That new account of his has been already involved in edit warring in at least 2 different articles (check his talk page), gave false statements to an administrator by saying he's "new and still learning" which clearly is playing the system. All this along with the systemic bias and edit pattern... AlexCovarrubias 16:01, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
- I suggest you make a list of all the registered accounts and all the IPs you want to be included in an SPI report. So far there is no official WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Corticopia so one should eventually be made. Whoever submits this report should collect all the past ANIs about Corticopia, since that would provide the evidence of abuse that is needed to justify a checkuser. A list should be made of all the accounts that were blocked in the past as Corticopia. He is also mentioned in my user talk archives, and all those references should be found to see if they are relevant. EdJohnston (talk) 16:00, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
- I think I have all the requiered information, past accounts, IPs... I have opened a talk in the ANI . Please comment there. AlexCovarrubias 22:53, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
- I suggest you make a list of all the registered accounts and all the IPs you want to be included in an SPI report. So far there is no official WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Corticopia so one should eventually be made. Whoever submits this report should collect all the past ANIs about Corticopia, since that would provide the evidence of abuse that is needed to justify a checkuser. A list should be made of all the accounts that were blocked in the past as Corticopia. He is also mentioned in my user talk archives, and all those references should be found to see if they are relevant. EdJohnston (talk) 16:00, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
Dear Ed. I have also tagged other two IP with the appropiate template since they are from the same range, city and ISP as the one IP you already blocked. Please check edit pattern (Europe, Georgia), because it is consistent. You blocked 76.66.124.5 and I've already tagged IP 76.66.127.109 and IP 76.68.80.199. Please check contributions log. I think it is obvious it is the same and I believe those should be blocked aswell. I also don't understand why you didn't block user Superluminary since he admited to be IP 76.66.124.5 well thank you very much for helping in this complex situation. AlexCovarrubias 00:24, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
- You've performed a service by collecting the data. I do join you in suspecting the two additional 76.66.* IPs as being Corticopia. Perhaps a stronger case could be made if someone would collect instances of the POV 'Georgia is not in Europe' and show more than one sock expressing that opinion. A complete search of Georgia (country) might well show participation by more than one Corticopia sock. Blocking IPs with a short edit history is not so easy if they have not done very much so far that is distinctive. Of course, most of his socks do earn warnings on their talk page very soon after their first appearance. Usually, every sock gets involved in reverting. This helps to pick them out of the crowd in cases where multiple IPs work on an article. EdJohnston (talk) 17:31, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
- Other than at Talk:Georgia, the only use on WP of the phrase "Georgia is not in Europe" comes at this edit. Off-wiki, it comes up here, here and here.LeadSongDog come howl! 18:30, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for checking on this. The history of Georgia (country) shows Corticopia disputing with User:Sosomk at Georgia (country) back on 20:37, 20 May 2007. Corticopia wanted 'a country in the Caucasus' to become 'a Eurasian country in the Caucasus.' though he also made other changes. Corti. made multiple reverts against Sosomk. One of the 76.66.* IPs who is recently active makes practically the same edit in July 2010, changing 'Europe' to 'Eurasia' in that article. This is getting close to genuine sock evidence. See also an edit by the 76.68 IP to the same article, making Europe into Eurasia. EdJohnston (talk) 19:49, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
- Other than at Talk:Georgia, the only use on WP of the phrase "Georgia is not in Europe" comes at this edit. Off-wiki, it comes up here, here and here.LeadSongDog come howl! 18:30, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
Maybe this can help to establish User:Chipmunkdavis as another sock of Corticopia. Edit pattern is consistent, but this may be more interesting , he created a new article named "List of Eurasian countries and territories". Also check this edit of Corticopia in the article Cyprus (he's known for this POV about Cyprus and Georgia) and this edit of Chipmunkdavis adding a cite to note that North Cyprus is not in Europe. Also Corticopia favored the term "Australia or Australasia" instead of Oceania in the article Continent and Chipmunkdavis does the same . I think it is clear now that they are the same.
Ed, I was wondering if it was ok to call him Corticopia because he has used several accounts before that, and trying to link him with that one sometimes might be difficult because he stopped using that sockpuppet master account. Remember he abandoned that account and started editing anonymously. AlexCovarrubias 00:00, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
- The age of the master account should not prevent us from using the name 'Corticopia' for the sock case. Most of the inference is by behavior; I doubt that checkuser could do much. Corticopia has never come forward to deny a connection to these other accounts. It seems to me that he declared in summer 2008 that he would no longer use his main account and would only sock from then on. (I don't have a link to his statement, though). EdJohnston (talk) 00:23, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
- Ok, please read this carefully. A user by the name User:Mclay1 is currently "supporting" any change made by Chipmunkdavis, or vice-versa. That account has been focused in making minor changes about the band The Beatles. Very suspiciously until recently (May 2010) he started editing in the same articles Chipmunkdavis actively is, as well as some minor edits to articles that Corticopia account used to edit. Both seem to be online around the same time of the day.
- Mclay1 is just like Chipmunkdavis, until recently, editing in the articles: List of European countries, List of Asian countries, List of Oceanian countries... the same articles Chipmunkdavis was introducing changes to. Check their contribution list and you'll see. Mclay1 also is "interested" in Turkey, Cyprus and Eurasia . And has done "small" changes to at least one article that Corticopia used to be obssesed with such as UN geoscheme for the Americas .
- I noticed this because just now, Mclay1 reverted to an edit made by Chipmunkdavis. It seems that "he asked him" to do it in his talk page. I guess Chipmunkdavis didn't want to drag more attention to his account and that's why he stopped edit warring with me. Guess what kind of edit they both reverted? One related to clearly denoting Central America. AlexCovarrubias 10:22, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
Ed, I think we do need a CheckUser , now Corticopia is cowardly acussing me of not assuming "good faith" and "ownership of articles". I just wouldn't let a sockpuppet game with the system. AlexCovarrubias 19:55, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
User talk:Wtshymanski
Looks like your comments to User talk:Wtshymanski were erased as well. Oh well for being taken seriously. . . ----moreno oso (talk) 17:03, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
Edit warning
Hello, Did you post your edit warning to user Noleander as well? and why not?Curvesall (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:30, 12 August 2010 (UTC).
- He's been participating at WP:ANI#Need help with non-native-English-speaking editor, so I don't think he needs a warning. I urge you to join that discussion and comment on the points he is making there. If we hear only one side of the dispute, people may assume that there is no case for your side. EdJohnston (talk) 00:00, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
username
- Hi, how is it working when a user creates a name that is a real life person and gets involved in issues surrounding that living person? I thought they should be blocked until they either self identify as that living person or they should get a new username and stop asserting that they are that living person? Issue is a general question but is on relation to this user who is as I know in a legal issue with the Tolkien family. Google search for the username. I would block him and point him towards OTRS to identify or if he doesn't want to or can't do that then he should change his name. Off2riorob (talk) 21:17, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
- I am personally convinced this is the named person. Who else would go to so much trouble to defend CC's interests, or know so much about the legal case? We'll see if he responds to your question. EdJohnston (talk) 21:34, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, lets see - I am sure you have an eye on him, thanks. I do think sometimes we allow these type of claims to go unchecked when we should confront them sooner, as in..either confirm you are that person or stop claiming to be him.Off2riorob (talk) 21:38, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi Ed, he has replied and is asserting he is that person in real life, I have asked him to identify and not to edit in articles and discussions related to his real life until he self identifies to OTRS and I have asked one of the OTRS volunteers I know to assist him in identifying. If you think there is a better way to proceed please do and if you know someone from OTRS that would be good to help please also do notify them. Off2riorob (talk) 12:53, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
- We have no articles that discuss Christopher Carrie at present. My recommendation is to not add any information about the Tolkien/Carrie legal disputes to the Tolkien family article. Until editors have decided to cover this topic I don't see why we need CC to prove his identity. If he chooses to voluntarily self-identify through OTRS that's harmless. If he were to persist in adding information about Carrie (from personal knowledge) but declined to use OTRS then he could be blocked from that username. EdJohnston (talk) 14:02, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
- Right, I will convey that to him, basically, he should not really discuss the issues without identifying to OTRS as I see it, if he is claiming to be a living person and discussing himself that is a clear issue imo. Thanks, lets see what he wants to do. Off2riorob (talk) 14:18, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Help needed with new, non-English-speaking editor
Could you please help again regarding: Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Need_help_with_non-native-English-speaking_editor. You did place a 3RR warning on the editor's talk page. Thanks for that. But mis-behavior is continuing (details in the ANI section). Any help is appreciated! --Noleander (talk) 18:27, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
- Your advice here is well-taken. Maybe you should use more RFCs for the points still in dispute. The discussion does not appear to be stalled, and I don't see any 3RR violation, so it is not clear that any admin action is needed. EdJohnston (talk) 01:31, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
- Okay. I was just looking for a second editor to independently re-affirm the WP polices (V, OR, MOS, 3RR, etc) to the new editor. I think that if 2 or 3 editors emphasize the policies, the new editor would pause and try to understand the rules. For some reason, he was not listening to me alone. After I requested your help, another editor joined the Talk page so at least there is a second veteran voice participating. So I don't need your help at this point in time. I'll ping you again if things get out of hand. Thanks. --Noleander (talk)
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Me being blocked
I have stopped editing on Barry Hall as soon as I was given the warning, I haven't made an edit on the article since only on the discussions page. So why am I going to be blocked when I have followed the rules and not made a single edit since? GuineaPigWarrior 22:00, 17 August, 2010.
User:124.176.118.18
I noticed you edited the section. This means you are dealing with it? I am not seeking a block. Just someone to have a word with him about using talk pages. Dapi89 (talk) 13:20, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
- The IP seems to have access to some of the same documents that you do, but he has been quite stubborn. I hope he will come back and participate further after the block expires. EdJohnston (talk) 14:27, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
I'd still be interested in understanding the way in which the 1950 FB.VI manual I linked to is inaccurate or indeed totally wrong. The limits which appear there {http://www.zenoswarbirdvideos.com/Images/Mosquito/MosquitoFB6Manual.pdf) are the same as appear in the Crecy notes for the NF.38 - that's a fact, not opinion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.176.118.18 (talk) 21:25, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
User:188.140.88.37
Hey Ed. User:188.140.88.37, who made an edit to Talk:Celts, is clearly Sleeping water trying to avoid his block. Care to handle it?--Cúchullain /c 12:11, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
- Block extended. EdJohnston (talk) 13:50, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
- nonsente I made the edit refuting Sleeping water comments. By the way my Ip is portuguese, and Sleeping water happens to be in some other location and we do not agree at all. He claims tribes from Iberia were not celts I defend exactly the opposite. Read the edit, he defends the Putzger Historical Atlas, and I say it has not always been very accurate. Anyway check his location he is in probably France, but being in france does not mean bean ethnically french, maybe it is why he has that out of africa
early 20th century fixation about the iberians and acquitanians 89.214.202.30 (talk) 15:03, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
St Kilda Football Club article again
The indefinitely blocked editor User:BrianBeahr, aka User:Sainterman, seems to be back on the St Kilda Football Club article again with yet another sockpuppet user name - User:BJWrwandb. I have just reverted dozens of edits all which conform exactly to Brian's easily identifiable editing style. Can you please have a look at this. Thanks. Afterwriting (talk) 15:48, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
- Blocked. I am relying on your ability to recognize his editing style, because his changes all look quite technical to me. What I can observe is that he made a large number of changes in a short time, and he must have gone to some trouble to get the account autoconfirmed, to avoid the semiprotection. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 16:41, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Omid Kordestani (Kurdish or Persian)
Hey Ed, I wonder if you can help. in regards to Omid Kurdistani's ethnic background, there seems to be a lot number of Persian ethnics in wiki and the web, some are administrators I believe, try to impose Persian ethnicity on Omid Kurdistani, just because he (Omid) mentioned that he is either Iranian, or that he was born in Tehran, or that he speaks Persian, and that they never heard him speak Kurdish???? These Persian wiki/web individuals rush deliberately to impose that Omid Kurdistani is not a Kurd but a Persian??!! just thought to give you some heads up in regards to the region’s mentality and the Kurdish issue at the forefront as it seems from your name (Anglo Saxon) you are a neutral individual ...........You see, a person born in Tehran, says I am Iranian (Kurds are actually Iranian but they are not Persians), and speaks Persian, can without any doubt be an ethnic Kurd. These Persian individuals know this fact 100%, but they deliberately ignore it. the reason I am saying this is because this description actually describes myself as well. there are thousands and thousands of Kurds in the same situation that do not even speak there mother tongue. In middle east no ethnic Arab, Persian, nor Turk, will name his family name as Kurdistani unless he is actually originally Kurd himself or is descended from a Kurdish heritage, one reason is that the hate they carry toward everything Kurdish,. if you follow the news of the region and the tension between different ethnicities you'll know this fact.....you see the story goes like this with those individuals, let's take an example of the famous Kurd Saladin > he was always described by Arabs and other ethnics that he is either Arab, Turk or whatever, although there are tons of historical records that always described him as a Kurd, but these docs were deliberately brushed aside just because this Kurd made a fame and glory in history that he became an envy of the world, automatically these individual model type go to work and bring up amazing fantasies that will describe him as from their background or other, but NOT KURDISH, the fantasies goes that he is related to this Arab tribe that was kurdisized, that he is Iranian origin lived with the kurds became bla bla bla bla.....etc....etc....etc If Omid's Name was Omid Faresi, they would have said, Faresi means Persian then he is a Persian. I do not have a problem if Omid actually is a persian, but the problem is he never said that, there are no sources to prove this, he said I am iranian (well kurds are also Iranians), he speaks in Persian (well actually many Kurds speak several languages, persian, arabic, and turkish all at the same time). I wonder if Saladin lost war against the crusade, I am 100% sure that none of those model types would have said he belonged to their race, they'd say right a way, oooh he is Kurdish.......I hope you understand what I am saying.
As myself am from Middle East, NOT ONE OF THOSE ETHNICS EVER OTHER THAN THE KURDS THEMSELVES WILL CARRY THIS NAME PROUDLY. I have never seen or heard that somebody with kurdistani name is not Kurdish, they are either lying, or that the individual became assimilated, and only the name survived this assimilation. There are thousands and thousands of families all over the middle east with the name kurdistani, Kurdi, or Al kurd, or al akrad, or kredi that are totally assimilated into other ethnics, but their origin survives in the name. Omid might be assimilated to persian, but the way of our culture back in middle east, the ethnic related last name designates the individual as ethnically belonging to that group, this rule does not apply in Turkey, as all the names forced MUST be TURKISH, such as the leader of kurdish party Ahmad TURK.
One interesting question I have, why after all this upheaval in regards to Omid’s ethnic origin, why Omid did not come out and verbally announced that he IS NOT KURD, and that HE IS AN ETHNIC PERSIAN
Can you please investigate this web site, reverse the changes that imposes the persian ethnicity on him (if you found what I write makes sense of course), and then if you may correct his ethnic designation from Persian to Iranian (Since Kurdish & Persians are Iranians) and then please restrict access to those individuals.
God Bless —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.15.174.73 (talk) 20:50, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
- His birth in Tehran is well-sourced in the article. There is even a video of a speech he gave at a college commencement where he says he was born in Tehran. Do you think our article should contradict what he says himself? EdJohnston (talk) 21:48, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Many Kurds are born in Tehran, that does mot make them Persians, but they are Iranians, there is no argument about it. he says I am Iranian, therefore, the ethnicity should be changed to Iranian —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.254.122.70 (talk) 22:44, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Regarding Machine Elf 1735
Regarding WP:AN3#User:Machine Elf 1735 reported by User:Andrew Lancaster (Result: ), how long will it take before I hear back in regard to what I've posted there? As I explained, I don't believe I've done anything wrong and I need assistance in the situation with User:Andrew Lancaster.
I'm not sure what sanctions would be but if the consensus is that his unconstructive edits are good for the encyclopedia, I'm more than happy leave him to it. I've spent countless hours responding to his demands only to have him start retaliating and selectively deleting my cited work. And does reverting his removal of an OR tag for un–cited material count as a revert? Should I not have used the "undo" button? Surely, that can't the right thing, is it?—Machine Elf 1735 (talk) 23:02, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry, I just got your message. I'll gladly stay away from that article for 7 days if User:Andrew Lancaster's behavior will be investigated.—Machine Elf 1735 (talk) 23:04, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
- But I still don't understand exactly how I broke 3RR. The reverts were all different.—Machine Elf 1735 (talk) 23:06, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
- See WP:REVERT: "..reverting may also refer to any action that reverses the actions of other editors, in whole or in part." Changes to unrelated sections of an article still count up to the total number of reverts. I am not planning to 'investigate' Lancaster. Your best bet is to attract more editors to the article, perhaps by opening a WP:Request for comment on the unresolved points. EdJohnston (talk) 23:13, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
- Ah, per page. What do I need to do to have Lancaster be asked to take a holiday too? He most definitely reverted more than 3 of my actions, in addition to leaving the article in a red cite error state because of it.—Machine Elf 1735 (talk) 23:18, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
- On August 20, Lancaster has made only three reverts (since a block of consecutive edits by one person count as only one revert). Neither of you can expect any credit for calm, sensible editing. You yourself have 91 edits to the article, while Lancaster has 64. The same person would often made a long run of edits that were only a few minutes apart. This hardly allows time for compromises to be worked out on the talk page, and does not suggest any effort to persuade. EdJohnston (talk) 23:26, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
- Ah, per page. What do I need to do to have Lancaster be asked to take a holiday too? He most definitely reverted more than 3 of my actions, in addition to leaving the article in a red cite error state because of it.—Machine Elf 1735 (talk) 23:18, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Quite a few of my edit were prior to Lancaster becoming involved in editing the page. Also the first block of my edits were when I was tasked with merging it with Actus et potentia. But it's Lancaster's rapid and escalating talk page demands that are much more of an issue than rapid edits to the article... I've had to spend an enormous amount of time responding to that talk page and to Talk:Energeia (one of the articles to be merged). Would it make any difference if I could prove he's made false and misleading statements in his "charges"?
But if that's not the sort of thing you usually look into, I don't want to impose. Should I open a WP:AN3 like he did? I've collected this list from Aug 20 where Lancaster has reversed actions of mine, in whole or in part. (That's not all, and that's just the 20th).
- Lancaster's deletion of most of what I've worked on in the article:
- My changes to the definitions in the lead from 01:43, 20 August 2010:
- My addition of modal logic to the lead from 02:30, 20 August 2010:
- My changes to §Actuality from 01:10, 20 August 2010:
- My addition of an OR tag from 00:58, 20 August 2010
Please let me know if more instances or additional information on each would be helpful. Or anything that would help shed some light. Thank you.—Machine Elf 1735 (talk) 00:25, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
FYI, I did open a RfC on the OR tag removal. Unfortunately, there aren't many "Aristotelian" philosophers in general and fewer on WP but yes, I'm hoping it might get the attention of an admin who knows a thing or two about Aristotle and won't be intimidated.—Machine Elf 1735 (talk) 00:49, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Message added 06:03, 21 August 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Lancaster's first edit to the article was 12:41, 17 August 2010, directly after a string of 41 edits, by me, going backing through Aug 7. (There are 2 unrelated edits July 31). The wp:EDSUM for the 41st reads: "merge content from Actus et potentia from through . This step is required in order to conform with Misplaced Pages's licensing requirements." There's nothing ambiguous.
I found three non–consecutive reversals within a 24 hour period. Has the prior WP:AN3 completely shut down? Do I need to start a new one?—Machine Elf 1735 (talk) 13:34, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
- I'm not going to work on the articles ever again. See the WP:AN3 thread...
- Four, I don't have. Thank you.—Machine Elf 1735 (talk) 14:21, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
A few things that might be relevant if I may comment:
- 1. Can Machine Elf give a diff for "Also the first block of my edits were when I was tasked with merging it with Actus et potentia." He has occasionally made these comments about how he did jobs I demanded he do. My memory was that when merge discussion was still friendly for example on Talk:Energeia he pro-actively asked for time to do some jobs himself, his way, and there was no pushing or dispute about this. Things got heated when he suddenly unilaterally starting removing merge tags, and moving drafts we had agreed to work on. I have no idea what caused these sudden changes, but from later comments it seems to be that Machine Elf became extremely uncomfortable with the edits being made by other people on "his" work.
- 2. EdJohnson, you write that "Neither of you can expect any credit for calm, sensible editing. You yourself have 91 edits to the article, while Lancaster has 64. The same person would often made a long run of edits that were only a few minutes apart. This hardly allows time for compromises to be worked out on the talk page, and does not suggest any effort to persuade." Making a series of connected edits during a complex job like merging is almost impossible to avoid isn't it? So what you are saying is presumably that these edits may have come without warning or agreement or attempted agreement, right? But then you really need to look at the talk pages, which is where Machine Eld's description of my behavior is that I am "demanding", in other words quite actively trying to get answers, proposals, comments etc. At one point he said that it looked like I was simply desperate for attention, which in a way is true. Postings requesting clarifications and proposals go without answering, and then there are sudden releases of obscenity and personal attack, and then I try again and again, and then eventually I actually do some editing, and so on.
- 3. I have by the way posted some comments about the present article freeze at the 3R noticeboard. Machine Elf clearly sees it, or wants to see it, as something directed at me, and justifying his demands, which were indeed that he wanted editing stopped. That does not seem to be the real intention and if I compare to my understanding of the real intention, it may be heading things in the wrong direction. Of course, if my editing needs adjustment someone should contact me.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 08:05, 21 August 2010 (UTC)