03:1903:19, 23 June 2016diffhist+158
Judy Wilyman
Much better to relocate UOW's facts, rather than delete and edit war with this guy. For the best, don't we think?
11:3611:36, 2 June 2016diffhist+265
Judy Wilyman
Undid revision 723325846 by
Bilby (
talk) When Bilby refers to we he refers to he and his cooperation with the subject Wilyman. Extreme case of COI. Bilby prove your claims first before removing image.
11:1511:15, 2 June 2016diffhist+265
Judy Wilyman
Undid revision 723321756 by
Bilby (
talk) On Bilby's invented claims of copyright breach he started on Commons Deletion he provided no evidence, just his heresay. Prove your claims first.
10:2610:26, 2 June 2016diffhist+265
Judy Wilyman
Undid revision 723312846 by
Bilby (
talk) As usual, AntiVax Officer Bilby has provided no substance to his removal claims, this time alleged copyright breach.
21:0821:08, 21 May 2016diffhist−162
Judy Wilyman
Undid revision 721367314 by
Bilby (
talk) Please comprehend the concept of consensus on talk. This misleading and unsubstantiated comment does not have consensus. Thank you.
20 May 2016
15:0515:05, 20 May 2016diffhist−162
Judy Wilyman
Apologies for any unintended offense this may bring, but the adding of this sentence does not have consensus on talk.
03:1503:15, 20 May 2016diffhist−132
Judy Wilyman
Undid revision 721143136 by
Bilby (
talk) Vague sensationalism. Not proven to be related to subject in article, unspecified & ambiguous use of word "threat". Breach of
WP:OR.
01:0301:03, 13 May 2016diffhist−137
Judy Wilyman
Undid revision 719985361 by
Bilby (
talk) No that particular quote is not clearly relating to Wilyman, that's ur
WP:OR. DO NOT REVERT, u take it to talk & get 2nd opinion from admin without
WP:COI
00:5000:50, 13 May 2016diffhist−137
Judy Wilyman
Undid revision 719983066 by
Bilby (
talk) Pls stop your
WP:OWN of this article admin. The 1st part of article refers to Wilyman & rel to topic. This 2nd sent does not ref to Wilyman & is
WP:OR.
03:1503:15, 28 April 2016diffhist+459
Peter Dingle
Undid rem of Prof cite- WP:BLOGS = "Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the subject matter, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications"
02:3302:33, 28 April 2016diffhist−85
Peter Dingle
Rem frivolous [us] tag put on cites are inline with
WP:RS policy. One cite is from Wilyman herself (ie fact). The other is from a respected Prof who says in article "I always check references and sources to the best of my ability before publishing".
03:1903:19, 23 June 2016diffhist+158
Judy Wilyman
Much better to relocate UOW's facts, rather than delete and edit war with this guy. For the best, don't we think?
11:3611:36, 2 June 2016diffhist+265
Judy Wilyman
Undid revision 723325846 by
Bilby (
talk) When Bilby refers to we he refers to he and his cooperation with the subject Wilyman. Extreme case of COI. Bilby prove your claims first before removing image.
11:1511:15, 2 June 2016diffhist+265
Judy Wilyman
Undid revision 723321756 by
Bilby (
talk) On Bilby's invented claims of copyright breach he started on Commons Deletion he provided no evidence, just his heresay. Prove your claims first.
10:2610:26, 2 June 2016diffhist+265
Judy Wilyman
Undid revision 723312846 by
Bilby (
talk) As usual, AntiVax Officer Bilby has provided no substance to his removal claims, this time alleged copyright breach.
21:0821:08, 21 May 2016diffhist−162
Judy Wilyman
Undid revision 721367314 by
Bilby (
talk) Please comprehend the concept of consensus on talk. This misleading and unsubstantiated comment does not have consensus. Thank you.
20 May 2016
15:0515:05, 20 May 2016diffhist−162
Judy Wilyman
Apologies for any unintended offense this may bring, but the adding of this sentence does not have consensus on talk.
03:1503:15, 20 May 2016diffhist−132
Judy Wilyman
Undid revision 721143136 by
Bilby (
talk) Vague sensationalism. Not proven to be related to subject in article, unspecified & ambiguous use of word "threat". Breach of
WP:OR.
01:0301:03, 13 May 2016diffhist−137
Judy Wilyman
Undid revision 719985361 by
Bilby (
talk) No that particular quote is not clearly relating to Wilyman, that's ur
WP:OR. DO NOT REVERT, u take it to talk & get 2nd opinion from admin without
WP:COI
00:5000:50, 13 May 2016diffhist−137
Judy Wilyman
Undid revision 719983066 by
Bilby (
talk) Pls stop your
WP:OWN of this article admin. The 1st part of article refers to Wilyman & rel to topic. This 2nd sent does not ref to Wilyman & is
WP:OR.
03:1503:15, 28 April 2016diffhist+459
Peter Dingle
Undid rem of Prof cite- WP:BLOGS = "Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the subject matter, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications"
02:3302:33, 28 April 2016diffhist−85
Peter Dingle
Rem frivolous [us] tag put on cites are inline with
WP:RS policy. One cite is from Wilyman herself (ie fact). The other is from a respected Prof who says in article "I always check references and sources to the best of my ability before publishing".