And I disagree with your assessment. Non-righteous block, fraudulent claim
of "vandalism only" account, edits had sources including sources brought
from other articles on wikipedia that have not been challenged.
Parker
On 10/8/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG <guy.chapman(a)spamcop.net> wrote:
On Sat, 7 Oct 2006 18:50:40 -0500, "Parker Peters"
<onmywayoutster(a)gmail.com> wrote:
The "original" account was claimed to be
NoLongerScieno (blocked for
"name..") and the second account was ScienoSitter.
Possible sockpuppet? Certainly.
Worthy of blocking under name block? Maybe.
Wrongful to tag as a "vandalism only" account and wrongful to block for
being a sockpuppet of a username block? Definitely.
I reviewed the edits of both accounts, 100% vandalism (POV-pushing).
Righteous block. Next case, please.
Guy (JzG)
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l