Wikipedia:Historical archive/Conflicts between users

Stop!

Before you add to this page, read and understand Wikipedia:User conflict policy

(Archived conflicts at: Wikipedia:Conflicts_between_users/archive1)

List of conflicts

User:ChrisDJackson (Kingturtle)

Chris Jackson has made more than 150 edits to Al Gore in less than five days. Who knows what damage is done. It is going to take some time to make sure nothing important was lost. This is a waste of all our time, and a burden. This craziness has got to stop. Kingturtle 08:18, 3 Jan 2004 (UTC)

The user in question appears to be a partisan of the Democratic Party; his goal seems to be to provide POV articles on Democratic politicians, whom he name-drops often. Scooter 09:39, 3 Jan 2004 (UTC)

From Wikipedia:Vandalism in progress:

Appears to be vandalizing Al Gore. Seth Ilys 04:29, 30 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Has now created the User:ChrisDJackson account, but continues to vandalize Al Gore. RickK 04:11, 1 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Now messing with Clinton-Gore Administration, formerly Clinton administration. - Seth Ilys 00:19, 2 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Much of Clinton-Gore Administration is copied from http://www.americanhistory.or.kr/book/files/ethirteen07.html. But I'm tired of not getting any support in my battle with this guy (hear that, Jiang?), and have given Chris full support to wage his POV war. RickK 00:23, 2 Jan 2004 (UTC)

I think part of his website [1] sheds light on why he might be having problems writing neutrally. Maximus Re x 00:26, 2 Jan 2004 (UTC)

He seems to be generally well-meaning, just writing with a *very* strong POV. - Seth Ilys 00:34, 2 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Please, someone with the proper counselling skills tell this guy to stay away from the Al Gore article and any related subjects. This is more of POV over-enthusiasim than vandalism. Make Clinton-Gore Administration into a redirect to bill Clinton, like Clinton Administration is. --Jia ng 09:00, 2 Jan 2004 (UTC)

User:ChrisDJackson has now set his sights on George W. Bush...as you may infer, there are several unflattering items that have been added which probably should be more carefully researched, or at the very least, NPOV language should be employed. Scooter 00:28, 4 Jan 2004 (UTC)

ChrisDJackson contravenes the basic rules of wikipedia by making offensive personal attacks against other users. eg, "Hey stupid, how about you just mind your business." and "if you can't do better than that in your feble attempts, go home little child." (from User talk:ChrisDJackson). --snoyes 06:06, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC)

You dang right I do. You can report it all you want. This is a troll who is making false accusations and I want it to stop. ChrisDJackson

Who is the troll? You seem to call everyone who questions your edits a 'troll'. I guess that would make me a 'troll' too. Out of your 435 contributions, you have edited Al Gore 181 times. It seems that you are becoming a bit obsessive. Here are a few examples of your editing style, with your edit summaries as the link:

STOP! IF YOU PUT GORE'S CONTROVERSIES AND CONSPIRCYS ON HERE, YOU WILL HAVE TO DO IT TO EVERY OTHER PERSON

(No edit summary)

Bottom line is, you seem to be an overly confrontational user who is obsessed with Al Gore, and let this obsession show through in your edits. - Mark 03:26, 11 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Restoring the archived conflict subject. ChrisDJackson just made a massive delete of the talk at Talk:Al Gore without comment, after the page was protected because of an edit war in which he insisted on installing a copyrighted photo. Chris loves copyrighted pictures, and continues repeated edit wars in order to put the copyrighted pictures he's uploaded onto page after page. RickK 03:50, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

User:Ed Poor

Ed Poor moved to Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Ed Poor

User talk:Daniel Nagy

Daniel had removed a great deal of text from his talk page. I took a liberty by putting it all back in. I feel that the information on his talk page are important to keep public. If I am wrong, please tell me.

Daniel continues to remove texts from his talk page that he does not like. Please monitor. Kingturtle 03:06, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I don't see anything wrong with his removing text from his talk page. He should be allowed to remove anything he wants from pages in his user space. Perl 15:34, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)~

User:Richardchilton

I'm pretty convinced that the set {Richardchilton, Lancemurdoch, HectorRodriguez} has cardinality less than three, and possibly one. Their obsessions seem identical: e.g., [2] [3], [4] [5] [6] [7], [8] [9], even [10] [11]. It seemed pretty clear to me that neither Hector nor Richard were new users upon their putative arrival, and now Richard has started a move war on Khmer Rouge that has resulted in that page being protected, as well as numerous other POV additions. -- V V 20:45, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Or these: [12] [13]. -- V V 22:10, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I don't think this person denies using more than one account. I also don't think that using more than one account is against any policy in itself. Perhaps you can correct me? Morwen 22:11, Mar 3, 2004 (UTC)

Have you tried to solve the underlying political dispute? Secretlondon 20:53, Mar 3, 2004 (UTC)

Many users have tried talking to him/them. Look at the histories of the articles and talk pages in question if you believe your seeming implication that it is just me. I'm guessing that you haven't, based on this question. -- V V 21:47, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Why do you presume they are all the same person? I *know* you have very strong opinions on a lot of US topics - and so do they. They also seem to feel victimised, and I know that some users from your side of the fence *also* feel victimised. Some see a conservative bias, some see a "liberal" (as in US liberal) bias. I'm annoyed to see new users with strong POV instantly put on this page, by others with equally strong (but opposite POV). My way of dealing with is it not to edit pages relating to US politics. That may be cowardice on my part. We need to find a way of working through this which means that *all sides* need to compromise. Secretlondon 22:15, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I appreciate your not-totally-negative tone, but you don't seem to give me much credit. I presented my evidence. Rebut it if you can, but keep my POV out of it. (You seem to be the perennial skeptic, ignoring similar clear evidence of Hector's intentions.) -- V V 06:22, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Well, they have an identical editing style, they have made exactly the same points on the same articles. LM was active until 16 Jan. Hector appeared Feb 8, then disappeared feb 20. Richard's first edit was feb 20, some hours after Hector vanished. Now, you could maybe give them the benefit of the doubt, but I think assuming they are the same person isn't as unreasonable as you are making it out to be. Note there is no policy against using multiple usernames, anyway, so its sort of hard to see what this complaint is about - even if it is true, so what? Morwen 22:34, Mar 3, 2004 (UTC)

To answer your question: The complaint is the move wars, despite having policies explained to each account, and repeated POV additions. Add to that all the complaints against Hector and Lance, and you have a pretty big case. -- V V 06:22, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

This is one hypothesis. Here is another hypothesis: VeryVerily editted me so I went through his edit history and began re-reverting his unfair edits of myself and others - in other words, doing the same thing VeryVerily does all the time. I'm not sure why he hasn't accused me of being Kevehs or some other users he seems to be having a continual edit war with. Anyhow, VeryVerily can go on imagining these vast conspiracies directed against him (see the anarcho-capitalism discussion page - "Richardchilton above is almost certainly a sock puppet for HectorRodriguez and Lancemurdoch, who has a well-known agenda against me"), I have better things to do. It seems most of the people aside from VeryVerily who I have been arguing with have said I am not in accordance with the Naming conventions (common names) rule, so I have started a discussion on that page's discussion page (which I linked to from Village Pump). VeryVerily can go on a witchhunt and try to throw fuel on the Wikipedia fire, I'm going to try to come to a consensus agreement to this in one place instead of going off on investigations, witchhunts and multiple edit wars against multiple people on multiple pages. I'm waiting for a consensus to develop on editorial policy from that discussion page before making any subsequent edits on any pages regarding group names, so VeryVerily can rest knowing he's "won" as I won't be editting any pages for group names until consensus develops regarding this policy. -- Richardchilton 23:28, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Are you also or previously known as Richardchilton, Lancemurdoch and/or HectorRodriguez? VV isn't the only person who thought so (several people in IRC were of that opinion as well), so it's not simply a case of one user against another. Jamesday 00:07, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

He'll deny it and that will be grounds for doubt during proceedings because some people don't understand that trolls are born liars. He has the same New York ISP, the same ideology, the same interests and the same vendettas. He has announced his intention to engage in protracted edit wars, and admitted that he has been active on Wikipedia before this identity. See User:Tim Starling/Richardchilton IRC log. -- Tim Starling 00:20, Mar 4, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for posting the IRC logs! It does clarify a lot. I especially like the "I consider VeryVerily my main enemy" part. It's hard not to be flattered. -- V V 06:28, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I prefer to ask the leading questions, though. Subsequent events in IRC made things more clear than that log, with the you can't stop me baiting style. Ah well, one more reason to agree with Jimbo that blocking proxies like those he was using is worth doing. Jamesday 02:27, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

User:Richardchilton isn't a vandal/banned user

Even if Richard is Lance and Hector, so what!!!???? Lance and Hector weren't banned users. Behind the façade of all this bickering, Richard is being singled out for holding some beliefs that users who keep hounding him despise. I respect most of his critics (VV, e.g., is fair-minded and committed to NPOV), and I do believe that they're sincerely trying to act fairly. However, they need to be altered to the fact that they have a starkly different worldview that makes cooperating and communicating with this user a special challenge.

Mediators need to promote mutual understanding here, rather than continuing to chase this ideological outcast away. We need to have a greater appreciation of democratic pluralism in both rhetoric and action. Only when the persecution of this user stops, will he have the incentives to play by the rules of Wiki. If someone can foster constructive dialogue for a change, Hector has the potential to become an especially valuable contributor. He'd bring to the forefront of attention subjects that are customarily overlooked on Wiki (e.g., Sans-culottes). He'd introduce a fresh take on things and would broaden the horizons of the community of users as a whole. We should welcome the fact that this user brings a starkly different perspective to the site. We ought to welcome diversity of ideas and a multiplicity of perspectives. After all, this is the only way to write a world as diverse as it is. So please, try talking with him for a change, rather than rushing to the House Un-American Activities Committee (I mean the Wikipedia:Conflicts between users users page). 172 02:18, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

BTW, don't accuse me of a leftist agenda. Go to the October 2003 mailing lists, e.g., and note my ardent opposition to banning User:RK and my use of the same reasoning. Recently, I also remarked to User:G-Man that we desperately lack elderly contributors (giving us Gen-X and Baby Boom biases). Furthermore, I also noted the need to promote more non-Western admins a while ago. I'd also like to mediate an accord pledging mutual respect of differences of thought between Richard and his critics (VV, Jamesday, RickK, Robert Merkel, Tim Starling, and Ed Poor). 172 02:18, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

You can unblock him if you like, it won't make any difference. Now that his identity is revealed, he says he's going to change identities and use anonymous proxies. This makes things easy, because anonymous proxies can be blocked without debate, by Jimbo's decree. -- Tim Starling 02:35, Mar 4, 2004 (UTC)

I've unblocked him. See my message below. 172 04:22, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I don't care about his politics. I saw his attention-getting trolling in IRC and took a look, saw how he'd been using that approach in the Joseph Stalin article and merged in the edits which seemed to make sense during the time from before he started trolling to after the fighting he'd started ended with the proxy he was using being blocked. I agree that the article needs more work - but not by someone who's doing it with the expressed intent opf causing problems. That's why I told you I'd do more work on the article tomorrow, since it does need some significant work, IMO. Meanwhile, if you'd like the later IRC logs, please do accept my offer to send them to you privately - I'll use email if you prefer that route. I've no strong views on VV but I'm not particularly keen on edits like this one "people getting the flu, people getting cancer (which was Stalin's fault), old people getting really old and dying of old age" to the Joseph Stalin article by VV. Jamesday 02:37, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I'm not saying that users are deliberately targeting Lance/Hector/Richard due to his ideology. I'm saying that because Lance/Hector/Richard has a frame of reference and perspective starkly different from the vast majority of users with whom he interacts, conflict is likely due to the sheer difficulties of communication and reaching common ground. Hence, let's stop labeling Richardchilton a "vandal." He's only guilty of being an outcast, which makes following the informal norms and customs of users' community so problematic. Moreover, chasing him away has failed repeatedly. Instead, try attacking the root of the problem. We can do so by treating him as "one of us" - a welcomed user and member of the community. Doing so entails approaching him with an open mind, attempting to civilly discuss things with him on the talk pages. That way, he can work from within the rules, regulations, norms, and customs of Wiki to make his desired changes. This is a far more productive strategy than calling him a "Communist whitewasher," as many users have, and hysterically traversing all the problem user pages to lodge complaints. Despite the good intentions of Robert Merkel, Jamesday, PMA, Very Verily, RickK, Ed Poor, and Tim Starling, their approach to this user is confounding the problem. So let's try "constructive engagement." 172 04:08, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

That wasn't VeryVerily, but an obvious troll using a juvenile mockery of his username (VeryVeripee. --67.71.78.115 03:01, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I assumed that 172 was referring to a person with initials VV in relation to the JS article, since that's the only combination of 172, me and VV that I'm aware of. That not-VeryVerily VV initialed person did one of the edits I in the sequence I undid over in the JS article. My sympathies to VeryVerily if there's a troll doing annoying things and apologies to 172 if 172 intended someone other than the only VV which seemed to make sense in the context here. Jamesday 03:12, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I was referring to User:Very Verily, who is a critic of Lance, Hector, and now Richard. Very Verily is a competent user dedicated to NPOV. If the admins make the effort, perhaps we can facilitate a dialogue between him and Lance/Hector/Richard so that they can avoid edit wars. 172 04:08, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

i hope for everyone's sake that your belief in "constructive engagement" proves right and we don't all get taken for a ride and made to look fools. After his behaviour in Wiki and IRC, i can't be blamed for having a "healthy scepticism". PMA 04:26, Mar 4, 2004 (UTC)

66.47.62.78 (Szopen)

The user with obsession: she removes all "Polish" adjectives and turn them into "Polanen". She insert HRE, emperor anywhere she could. I am not sure, but I think this is user which was earlier widely known as H.J. - with whom I already discussed most of her changes THREE years ago. She ignores arguments and mostly continues on changing the pages in her won personal crusade.

It's sad that people like MichealTInkler and many others have left wikipedia whil she is still here...

At least she ceased to create numerous stub-articles from Prussian genealogy and fake artciles about Prussian origins and how Poles were badly treating god-like Prussians... (this comment written by Szopen)

User:66.47.62.78 is almost certainly User:H.J., so 66.47.62.78 is not allowed to contribute to Wikipedia (as Jimbo Wales repeated only recently, can't remember where). Kosebamse 10:32, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Links, please. Without links an entry in Conflicts between users is nothing. Also, if she is a hardbanned user, her IP address should also be banned. O p t i m^·.· 05:34, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

E.g here, 28 february: here. Note that changes were to add false information "for few months"

or here. Inserting "imperial" in random places.

here false information than Maximilian did not accept to became king of Poland - while he in fact was defeated in three battles and captured...

12.144.5.2 (ZackDude)

First of all I have nothing personal against 12.144.5.2 but he's been very uncooperative with writing articles with Wikipedia Users like me. I have tried to contact him numerous times however it's incredibly hard since he does not have a username or is even signed up with Wikipedia. Also, One of his habits is he never leaves spaces after punctuation and forcing people to clean up after himself. For instance look at the Freedom Tower, one of the articles I have contributed the most including drawing custom specification image designs for. Without a conversation on the article he edits the article for no reason and changes things around and puts a biased point of view on the article that the Freedom Tower will not be the tallest building in the world although according to various proof it will be according to regulations etc. He likes things his way without consideration of other users or compromises and puts in things totally unrelated to the main article. For instance see this and look at the changes he made. I am basically getting in a put this and change this battle with him and I would ask that an administrator/sysop looks at the work he has done and tells him to please sign up with Wikipedia as username, double check his work including punctuation, and talk with the Wikipedia users such as me before he puts any controversial facts or ideas that is not backed with anything.

Thank you -ZackDude 06:03, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

ZackDude...you "tried to contact me numerous times"?...you haven't answered my posting on your talk page there,and the posting on my talk page was for whatever reason not flagged for me as "new messages",which I am used to.Note that I post my name and email rather often,and you could have gotten hold of me that way.--12.144.5.2/Louis Epstein/le@put.com (using Lynx (browser))

The solution for Freedom Tower is very easy: Refer to the sources. Don't say "it will be the tallest" but "according to that newspaper it will be the tallest". It's not hard to communicate with him since he publishes his email address. My experience with him over List of dignitaries of mystical organisations some time ago was very positive and cooperative. The punctuation issue can be fixed easily, something that I am eager to do whenever I have the time. Please note, however, that we cannot force unpaid volunteers to change their spelling. O p t i m^·.· 05:30, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

This user has been discussed before, see Wikipedia:Conflicts_between_users/archive1#12.144.5.2 for an earlier discussion. Maximus Rex 06:10, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Anthony Di Pierro (RickK)

Sarcastic personal attacks, little collegiality. Now deleting listed items on Votes for Deletion without due process. RickK 04:16, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Is now deleting people's votes off the VfD page. RickK 04:29, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Huh? No I didn't...~~Maybe by accident...Where?~~ Anthony DiPierro 04:31, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Links, please. Without links an entry in this page is nothing. O p t i m^·.· 05:35, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

User:RickK (Zestauferov & Mestwin)

User:RickK is he a Nazi or not?? User:RickK claims that half of Poland belongs to Germany, and German names should be used for Polish cities in English Wikipedia. This is precisely a Nazi behaviour. User RickK threatens other users that he will block them just for calling Nazi behaviour a Nazi behaviour. This is precisely a Nazi behaviour. We have to do something or Neo-nazis like Rick will kill our memory about victims of the the Nazis. Mestwin 05:31, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Rick: you can threaten me or kill me, but others wiil come and call you the proper name you deserve.

I don't think I need to comment on this. RickK 05:35, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

RickK is not neutral in these conflicts, and I suggest he is excluded from dealing with Nazi articles. I especially demand that RickK stops reverting and blocking people just because he dosn't like them or their views. If Rick thinks somebody should be blocked - Let him allow other privileged users decide for him. Mestwin 06:34, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

RickK actually claims to be Jewish as far as I remember but his knowledge of things pertaining to the Jewish people is appaulingly inaccurate. The main problem is apparently that he is a vey sloppy reader even apparently confusing me with User:Levzur. It does not help that since he has become an administrator he deems himself beyond criticism and would rather mirror an accisation than deal with it. I am combining your complaint against him with mine from below. Zestauferov 04:28, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)

He is a deletionist prejudiced against me trying to censor my posts at Hittite because of influence from Ben (at first nick-naming me Ibero-Hurrian man and refering to myposts as nonsense, but who has since in some way appoloigized for misjudging me) Wetman & Llywrch. I try Wiki policy and Wikiquette but he totally ignores all my requests for discussion of differences. I have drunk so much tea I think I may be an addict now. Zestauferov 10:02, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Seems like everybody who crosses you is a problem user. Oh, well. Your edit history speaks for itself. You're a Georgian nationalist trying to rewrite the history of Europe in order to make it seem like Georgians have always been in their land, despite the history that the rest of the world seems to know. I am not prejudiced against you, I don't even know you. I just don't like the idea of seeding Wikipedia with false data. RickK 02:09, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I am not Georgian, I am British, and of Prussian-Jewish extraction and I live in Seoul, Korea. Where do you get these ideas from? Someone is feeding you lies. Zestauferov 01:10, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Maybe a confusion with user:Lezvur. Secretlondon 20:00, Feb 27, 2004 (UTC)

I've never claimed to be Jewish. I am not Jewish. I gew up in a fundamentalist Protestant family, but I prefer to consider myself agnostic leaning towareds pagan. RickK 07:28, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)

My appologies, I must have confused your religion with someone else's. That at least clears up a lot of confusion I had about your apparent opposition to themes pertaining to Jewish traditon. Zestauferov 07:46, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

You were thinking of user:RK in all likelyhood. I just figured out the difference last night. Sam Spade 08:32, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

RickK is an admin who abuses his privileges. Apparently others think so as well. He is on my list, although he is not #1 since he is not a total idealogue on some sort of jihad like Ed Poor. Richardchilton 09:50, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

So far as I know, I have never had a single dealing with Richardchilton, which should show that he is, indeed, someone else with a new name. RickK 02:55, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Sam Spade (RickK)

Is changing other people's comments on Talk pages. RickK 03:20, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Links, please. Without links an entry in Conflicts between users is nothing. O p t i m^·.· 05:32, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

[14]This link pretty well explains it. I might have over-reacted, but it's pretty clear that RickK and Bcorr were trying to get a rise out of me. Sam Spade 23:03, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

User:Gdansk (RickK)

User:Gdansk is not only engaging in edit wars on several Polish articles, but is calling those who disagree with him Nazis. RickK 05:21, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Links? O p t i m^·.· 05:35, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

User:Cantus and Russian names (Bcorr)

User:Cantus Contributions has been here for 4 days, but has decided to embark on a mission of changing transliteration of Russian names into his/her own idiosyncratic method (claimed to be ISO, but not completely standard), as well as adding in pronunciations, including high-profile articles on Lenin, Stalin, and the Soviet Union. Now Cantus has started moving pages and creating redirects from the old pages -- Fyodor Dostoevsky to Fyodor Dostoyevsky and Raisa Gorbachev to Raisa Gorbacheva.

Perhaps if I hadn't been a Russian major in college I wouldn't care, but 1) it doesn't seem to follow the standard conventions, and 2) I think Cantus's boldness is escalating. -- BCorr ¤ Брайен 23:43, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Now under discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_(places)#Transliteration_of_Russian_place_names -- BCorr ¤ Брайен 21:00, Feb 28, 2004 (UTC)

Update on 3/8/2004 -- Cantus is very active again.... BCorr ¤ Брайен 20:25, Mar 8, 2004 (UTC)

Theresa and Iris

Moved to Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Irismeister and /Irismeister

Paul Vogel/65.125.10.66/24.45.99.191/216.99.245.171/216.99.245.184/66.2.156.38

Moved to /Paul Vogel

User:Llywrch (Zestauferov)

Moved to /Llywrch

User:Wetman (Zestauferov)

First invited to "weigh-in" against me by Llywrch in November 2003 he immediately belittled my good-faith editing offering advice on how to distract my little brain http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Wetman#Concerning_Tiresome_Behavior now posts warning messages against almost anything I contribute to. I try Wiki policy and Wikiquette but he promotes me as a "troll" to other users. The bones of contention seem to be in any article i write but specifically based upon disagreement with the existence of any evidence that may support the legitimate Jewish tradition that so-called "Shemites" were originally an eastern people of whom some settled amidst speakers of what are now called Afro-Asiatic languages. It seems the respect for religious (perhaps not just Jewish) traditions is annoying for him particularly if in conflict with the fact that certain Protestant views which have been found to be without any scientific basis. Is is so unbelieveable that nations might preserve 'certain' traditions which may become backed up as having some historical accuracy as science progresses? The accusation is that I try to synthesize biblical traditions with historical evidence any time I try to clarify historical data and add sections or links about Biblical perspectives which happen not to be in contrast to the historical data. The fact that I have also clarified pages erroneously linking to biblical figures is overlooked. Following in the line of earlier prejudices against User:Yeti and User:Levzur (which instead of attempting to understand their cultural positions and bring them round gently, soon rubbed the latter the wrong way leading into conflict with User:RickK) he has now accused me of being involved in some kind of nationalist Urrecht movement (I cannot imagine what the details of this might be).Zestauferov 10:02, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)

An excruciatingly careful rewrite of Habiru is now being assembled by User:Benwbrum/Hapiru. My record speaks for itself; so does User:Zestauferov's. A troll is a person whose primary interest is in creating dissention and attracting attention. A clever troll adds just enough content not to be banned. I will not encourage neurotic needs for aggrievement further. Wetman 00:45, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Is calling me neurotic in line with Wikiquette? Well I would like to invite people to offer me constructive feed-back on my entries to see if I can do something to deflect this accusation. I thought a Troll is a monster that sits under a bridge and does not allow anyone to cross. Rather like someone who reverts any edits made to a page which they have written.Zestauferov 14:52, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)

User:Lir (many people)

Moved to Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Lir

User:OneVoice vs User:Viajero and User:BL

User:Viajero and User:BL have without discussion or consensus changed this page and its talk page to be redirects to Violence in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict 2004. The pages are significantly different. The first lists only terrorist attacks and the number killed therein. The second provides a single list that includes terrorist attacks and Arabs killed in attacking Israeli troops, and/or attempting to infiltrate into Israel. In other words, it lists without distinction murders and combat killings.

The vandalism extends to all the related pages:

and their talk pages.

I appears based upon the edit logs that User:Viajero and User:BL may be the same person. OneVoice 20:13, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)

In my opinion, there is absolutely no chance Viajero and BL are the same person. If this is a dispute over an article, it should be at Wikipedia:Current disputes over articles, not here. Angela . 21:32, Feb 3, 2004 (UTC)