On 10/9/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG <guy.chapman(a)spamcop.net> wrote:
On Mon, 9 Oct 2006 16:49:56 -0500, "Parker Peters"
<onmywayoutster(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> My thoughts exactly. "Parker
Peters"' last example turned out to be
> an unambiguous vandalism sock. I'm beginning to wonder if perhaps
> Parker Peters isn't better known to us by another name...
"Unambiguous"? Hardly. Unless you
didn't bother to read my reply earlier?
Yes, I read it. I also reviewed the contribution history, which is
after all the main thing.
As did I. And I came to the opposite conclusion. It's my opinion that the
edits might have been poorly phrased but they met the standard of RS, V, and
were consistent with writings in other articles we have regarding the same
subject matter.
Your definition of "vandalism" seems to be
that you disagree with an edit.
That's not a definition of
"vandalism" that anyone at Wikipedia is
supposed
to follow, and the last person I met who followed
that was a definite pov
warrior.
Nope. It was a POV warrior and a pretty blatant sock. Honestly, not
worth the bytes already spilled.
Again, I reached the opposite conclusion.
Now, where are the diffs Jimbo asked for? The last case seems much
more interesting.
The diffs were forwarded to Jimbo directly in a private email, before his
public request for diffs. I'm waiting for his private response on the
matter.
Parker