|
/User Pennsylvania Impressionism
On 3 July 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Modern Gothic cabinet, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Metropolitan Museum of Art's Modern Gothic cabinet (pictured) is considered one of the finest American examples of the style? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Modern Gothic cabinet), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
On May 4, 2016, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Twelfth Street Meeting House, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
On 23 February 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The Pennsylvania State Memorial, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the two largest Gettysburg Battlefield monuments " Pennsylvania State Memorial" and " Eternal Light Peace Memorial" were dedicated, respectively, on the 50th and 75th anniversaries of the 1863 Battle of Gettysburg, at battlefield reunion encampments? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
On May 7, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Girard Avenue Bridge, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The Photographer's Barnstar | |
For your original photographs on drinking fountains in Philadelphia! AleatoryPonderings ( talk) 20:29, 27 September 2020 (UTC) |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | ||
Thank you for significantly expanding Walter Elmer Schofield! Zigzig20s ( talk) 06:08, 19 November 2018 (UTC) |
The Original Barnstar | ||
Thank you for all your hard work at List of American painters exhibiting at the 1893 World's Columbian Exposition. The average wikiclod such as myself has no idea as to how much work goes into something like you created until they try it themselves. Carptrash ( talk) 22:45, 5 July 2018 (UTC) |
The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar | |
This Working Wikipedian's Barnstar goes out to BoringHistoryGuy for his inspired work at List of monuments of the Gettysburg Battlefield. Having discovered that over time the National Park Service was changing its web locations for over a thousand monuments he soldiered through all of them, making the necessary corrections where needed. Wikipedia might never die, but it can kill you so don't attempt this sort of thing yourself at home. BoringHistoryGuy is a highly not paid professional. Carptrash ( talk) 16:30, 20 January 2017 (UTC) |
The Writer's Barnstar | |
For writing encyclopedic content that makes this a better encyclopedia, at George Washington's tent and many, many other pages. E.M.Gregory ( talk) 09:10, 5 October 2016 (UTC) |
The Brilliant Idea Barnstar | |
I give you this barnstar for your important work on Hercules (chef). The article has become highly relevant, and has helped a lot of people get real historical knowledge about Hercules. I wish Ramin Ganeshram had read it before writing her book. ·maunus · snunɐɯ· 21:35, 19 January 2016 (UTC) |
The Editor's Barnstar | |
Temple Gold Medal. Nicely done! 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 15:15, 27 November 2015 (UTC) |
The Original Barnstar | |
Beautiful work. Daniel Pabst didn't make great beer, but he made awesome furniture. Your 'boring history' is almost lyrical. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 03:23, 24 December 2014 (UTC) |
The WikiProject Barnstar | ||
For your extensive contributions to the Military history WikiProject, as evidenced by your nomination in the 2014 "Military Historian of the Year" awards, I am delighted to present you with this WikiProject Barnstar! TomStar81 ( Talk) 02:30, 22 December 2014 (UTC) |
The Original Barnstar | |
Thanks for creating the new Drinking fountains in the United States article, and for expanding Wikipedia's coverage of water-related topics. NorthAmerica 1000 04:44, 1 November 2014 (UTC) |
Congratulations on your second Thumbs Up Award - (a record as far as I am aware) - this time for your awesome work on conceptualizing and actually using the concept on setting up and organizing the List of equestrian statues in the United States. My paltry attempts pale next to the perfection that you have produced. Perfect!! Carptrash (talk) 15:55, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
So . . ... I have a lot of sculpture related articles on my watchlist and you are slowly, one at a time, hitting them all. Because this is a good thing you have earned the seldom coveted Thumbs Up Award. Way to go. Einar aka Carptrash ( talk) 23:24, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
Congratulations,
you are one of a very select few
to receive this
seldom coveted award.
Carptrash (
talk) 20:12, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
Editor of the Week for the week beginning September 23, 2018 | ||
Recognized for Creating an article that is Wikipedia at its best:
List of American painters exhibited at the 1893 World's Columbian Exposition Researched and constructed an amazing chart. Found and dealt with copyright issues for dozens of images. You have been selected as Editor of the Week. Thank you for the great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project) |
Editor of the Week | ||
Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected as Editor of the Week for 95% of edits to article space, including outstanding work on Gettysburg articles. Thank you for the great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project) |
BoringHistoryGuy |
Image from the article Daniel Pabst, one of BHG's first articles and still a favorite |
Editor of the Week for the week beginning January 18, 2015 |
To BoringHistoryGuy, Wikipedia is an avocation. He will "research the hell out of a subject" and create or contribute to an article, many with a tie to Philadelphia. Just last week he was acknowledged as a pending changes reviewer and a trusted user and creator of referenced articles (autopatrolled). |
Recognized for |
Research, Research, Research. |
Nomination page |
Commons copyright info: [1]
Archived from Wikipedia:No original research/Noticeboard:
User:GramereC is posting original research to the Samuel Fraunces article. She claims to be a descendant of Fraunces, and asks that others stay out of the way for a week so she can complete her work (approaching 200 edits): User talk:GramereC#3RR.
Yesterday, User:Tuckerresearch cautioned her on this behavior, and pointed out her conflicts of interest: Talk:Samuel Fraunces#What is happening?
I think it is time for an administrator to intervene.
Thank you. BoringHistoryGuy ( talk) 20:02, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
User:GramereC – a.k.a. User:Coroinn, a.k.a. User:CRCole; a.k.a. User:71.58.75.28, a.k.a. User:166.217.248.24, a.k.a. User:72.69.56.203, a.k.a. User:69.86.246.30, a.k.a. User:71.58.105.199 – has flagrantly used the Samuel Fraunces article to disseminate her theories about Fraunces’s parentage, ancestry and descendants; to discredit the documentary record and legitimate scholarship on Fraunces; to promote conspiracy theories about and imply racists motives to those with whose work she disagrees; and to promote her self-published Fraunces biography.
Some of her most outrageous claims and accusations have been made on the talk page. But this complaint will be limited to original research added to the article. Below are some examples of original research added during periods in which she was the only editor of content:
User:Tuckerresearch confronted User:GramereC on some of her most outrageous and undocumented claims. Talk:Samuel Fraunces#Edward Fraunces → Samuel Fraunces? Talk:Samuel Fraunces#What is happening?, and User:GramereC deleted the items. But how can Wikipedia tolerate this behavior? BoringHistoryGuy ( talk) 18:07, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
User:GramereC – a.k.a. User:Coroinn, a.k.a. User:CRCole; a.k.a. User:71.58.75.28, a.k.a. User:166.217.248.24, a.k.a. User:72.69.56.203, a.k.a. User:69.86.246.30, a.k.a. User:71.58.105.199 – has flagrantly used the Samuel Fraunces article to disseminate her theories about Fraunces’s parentage, ancestry and descendants; to discredit the documentary record and legitimate scholarship on Fraunces; to promote conspiracy theories about and imply racists motives to those with whose work she disagrees; and to promote her self-published Fraunces biography.
Where has this happened??? again here is Boring History Guy going off on anyone who tries to remove anyting he says about Fraunces.GramereC 19:08, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
Some of her most outrageous claims and accusations have been made on the talk page. But this complaint will be limited to original research added to the article. Below are some examples of original research added during periods in which she was the only editor of content:
So if we use the talk page Boring History Guy gets angry and turns everything personal.GramereC 19:08, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
All three things are true but have often been removed because YOU Boring Old History Guy say so. That is fine remove the birth certificate because the dates vary remove burials for the same reason. Which is what you do. Even when it is replaced with some other work you blank it out. GramereC 19:08, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
Again much of this was removed by Boring Old History Guy. Not corrected with any type of note added. Much of this text is not mine but is what was there to begin with by some unsigned editor who is never identified. GramereC 19:08, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
User:Tuckerresearch confronted User:GramereC on some of her most outrageous and undocumented claims. Talk:Samuel Fraunces#Edward Fraunces → Samuel Fraunces? Talk:Samuel Fraunces#What is happening?, and User:GramereC deleted the items. But how can Wikipedia tolerate this behavior? BoringHistoryGuy ( talk) 18:07, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
I think this recent round of edits can be researched on their own. Again If you are going to use other Tertiary sources such as the museum pre visit or the booklet Kym Rice did for the FTM and SR you need to look at what references they used to begin with. GramereC 19:08, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
Prime problems are representing the current building as having been there since colonial times. It was a rebuild. GramereC 19:08, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
The portrait that FTM uses was purchased at auction in 1913 and although they say it is Fraunces they offer no provenance. The only way to verify where it came from is from SR published minutes. The way the portrait is continually put up front without recognizing that there is another earlier published sketch of Samuel Fraunces provided by family. Plus written description in conflict with the description is reprehensible in that they are in need of reproof. There are other places where the documents are just as reprehensible.GramereC 19:08, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
Limiting the secondary sources acceptable in your eyes necessitate exposing the primary documents because the primary documents are in conflict. Most of these conclusions were reached many years ago. You actual took WEB DuBois statement and had it written that Fraunces had no African blood. That just is not true all anyone has to do is read the final letter in the discussion. GramereC 19:08, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
You continue to go back to Fraunces Will and you do not give a viable source to find it. Then when I place one in your text as correction you take it back out. GramereC 19:08, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
User:BoringHistoryGuy on this Samuel Fraunces article is an entire section that has NOTHING published about it. This poisoning attempt – if it occurred – would have taken place in late June 1776 at Richmond Hill, Washington's headquarters in Manhattan. The housekeeper there was a widow named Mary Smith,[85] although there were other female servants. Fraunces's tavern was about two miles away and provided catered meals for the general and his staff. The reference included here is for the wrong thing.
This Wikipedia article then goes on to argue why Lossing's story is incorrect based on the assertion that the events took place at Richmond Hill. This is original work.GramereC 01:45, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
Particularly when a response is interleaved with the complaint. Editors here will not be able to work through all of the above content disputes. The only thing that is clear is that the two editors completely disagree on the content and that they cannot communicate with each other. GramereC, you cannot insist that only your version be included in the article. User:BoringHistoryGuy is a respected editor here and seems to have very good knowledge of the general area. If you cannot reach agreement with him on what should be included in the article, or find other editors who back your version, then you just cannot force your version of things into the article. We do things by consensus here.
I strongly urge you to write up your own version of the article in your own user space, then we'll be able to properly judge both the overall content of the "two" articles and individual sentences and paragraphs. If you are only willing to give us a choice between "your article" or "his article", my feeling is that editors will choose "his article." Smallbones( smalltalk) 20:01, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
Page:
Samuel Fraunces (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
User being reported:
GramereC (
talk ·
contribs ·
deleted contribs ·
logs ·
filter log ·
block user ·
block log)
Previous version reverted to: [diff preferred, link permitted] [21]
Diffs of the user's reverts:
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [28]
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [diff] Talk:Samuel_Fraunces#Request_for_Comment, an entire section trying to deal with this over weeks and weeks. The entire thing has gone on for many months, possibly years.
Comments:
One user, an SPA who brings in OR simply will not listen to others and insists that she is the only one with a say of what is in the article
Smallbones(
smalltalk) 17:35, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
|
/User Pennsylvania Impressionism
On 3 July 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Modern Gothic cabinet, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Metropolitan Museum of Art's Modern Gothic cabinet (pictured) is considered one of the finest American examples of the style? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Modern Gothic cabinet), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
On May 4, 2016, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Twelfth Street Meeting House, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
On 23 February 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The Pennsylvania State Memorial, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the two largest Gettysburg Battlefield monuments " Pennsylvania State Memorial" and " Eternal Light Peace Memorial" were dedicated, respectively, on the 50th and 75th anniversaries of the 1863 Battle of Gettysburg, at battlefield reunion encampments? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
On May 7, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Girard Avenue Bridge, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The Photographer's Barnstar | |
For your original photographs on drinking fountains in Philadelphia! AleatoryPonderings ( talk) 20:29, 27 September 2020 (UTC) |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | ||
Thank you for significantly expanding Walter Elmer Schofield! Zigzig20s ( talk) 06:08, 19 November 2018 (UTC) |
The Original Barnstar | ||
Thank you for all your hard work at List of American painters exhibiting at the 1893 World's Columbian Exposition. The average wikiclod such as myself has no idea as to how much work goes into something like you created until they try it themselves. Carptrash ( talk) 22:45, 5 July 2018 (UTC) |
The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar | |
This Working Wikipedian's Barnstar goes out to BoringHistoryGuy for his inspired work at List of monuments of the Gettysburg Battlefield. Having discovered that over time the National Park Service was changing its web locations for over a thousand monuments he soldiered through all of them, making the necessary corrections where needed. Wikipedia might never die, but it can kill you so don't attempt this sort of thing yourself at home. BoringHistoryGuy is a highly not paid professional. Carptrash ( talk) 16:30, 20 January 2017 (UTC) |
The Writer's Barnstar | |
For writing encyclopedic content that makes this a better encyclopedia, at George Washington's tent and many, many other pages. E.M.Gregory ( talk) 09:10, 5 October 2016 (UTC) |
The Brilliant Idea Barnstar | |
I give you this barnstar for your important work on Hercules (chef). The article has become highly relevant, and has helped a lot of people get real historical knowledge about Hercules. I wish Ramin Ganeshram had read it before writing her book. ·maunus · snunɐɯ· 21:35, 19 January 2016 (UTC) |
The Editor's Barnstar | |
Temple Gold Medal. Nicely done! 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 15:15, 27 November 2015 (UTC) |
The Original Barnstar | |
Beautiful work. Daniel Pabst didn't make great beer, but he made awesome furniture. Your 'boring history' is almost lyrical. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 03:23, 24 December 2014 (UTC) |
The WikiProject Barnstar | ||
For your extensive contributions to the Military history WikiProject, as evidenced by your nomination in the 2014 "Military Historian of the Year" awards, I am delighted to present you with this WikiProject Barnstar! TomStar81 ( Talk) 02:30, 22 December 2014 (UTC) |
The Original Barnstar | |
Thanks for creating the new Drinking fountains in the United States article, and for expanding Wikipedia's coverage of water-related topics. NorthAmerica 1000 04:44, 1 November 2014 (UTC) |
Congratulations on your second Thumbs Up Award - (a record as far as I am aware) - this time for your awesome work on conceptualizing and actually using the concept on setting up and organizing the List of equestrian statues in the United States. My paltry attempts pale next to the perfection that you have produced. Perfect!! Carptrash (talk) 15:55, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
So . . ... I have a lot of sculpture related articles on my watchlist and you are slowly, one at a time, hitting them all. Because this is a good thing you have earned the seldom coveted Thumbs Up Award. Way to go. Einar aka Carptrash ( talk) 23:24, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
Congratulations,
you are one of a very select few
to receive this
seldom coveted award.
Carptrash (
talk) 20:12, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
Editor of the Week for the week beginning September 23, 2018 | ||
Recognized for Creating an article that is Wikipedia at its best:
List of American painters exhibited at the 1893 World's Columbian Exposition Researched and constructed an amazing chart. Found and dealt with copyright issues for dozens of images. You have been selected as Editor of the Week. Thank you for the great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project) |
Editor of the Week | ||
Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected as Editor of the Week for 95% of edits to article space, including outstanding work on Gettysburg articles. Thank you for the great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project) |
BoringHistoryGuy |
Image from the article Daniel Pabst, one of BHG's first articles and still a favorite |
Editor of the Week for the week beginning January 18, 2015 |
To BoringHistoryGuy, Wikipedia is an avocation. He will "research the hell out of a subject" and create or contribute to an article, many with a tie to Philadelphia. Just last week he was acknowledged as a pending changes reviewer and a trusted user and creator of referenced articles (autopatrolled). |
Recognized for |
Research, Research, Research. |
Nomination page |
Commons copyright info: [1]
Archived from Wikipedia:No original research/Noticeboard:
User:GramereC is posting original research to the Samuel Fraunces article. She claims to be a descendant of Fraunces, and asks that others stay out of the way for a week so she can complete her work (approaching 200 edits): User talk:GramereC#3RR.
Yesterday, User:Tuckerresearch cautioned her on this behavior, and pointed out her conflicts of interest: Talk:Samuel Fraunces#What is happening?
I think it is time for an administrator to intervene.
Thank you. BoringHistoryGuy ( talk) 20:02, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
User:GramereC – a.k.a. User:Coroinn, a.k.a. User:CRCole; a.k.a. User:71.58.75.28, a.k.a. User:166.217.248.24, a.k.a. User:72.69.56.203, a.k.a. User:69.86.246.30, a.k.a. User:71.58.105.199 – has flagrantly used the Samuel Fraunces article to disseminate her theories about Fraunces’s parentage, ancestry and descendants; to discredit the documentary record and legitimate scholarship on Fraunces; to promote conspiracy theories about and imply racists motives to those with whose work she disagrees; and to promote her self-published Fraunces biography.
Some of her most outrageous claims and accusations have been made on the talk page. But this complaint will be limited to original research added to the article. Below are some examples of original research added during periods in which she was the only editor of content:
User:Tuckerresearch confronted User:GramereC on some of her most outrageous and undocumented claims. Talk:Samuel Fraunces#Edward Fraunces → Samuel Fraunces? Talk:Samuel Fraunces#What is happening?, and User:GramereC deleted the items. But how can Wikipedia tolerate this behavior? BoringHistoryGuy ( talk) 18:07, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
User:GramereC – a.k.a. User:Coroinn, a.k.a. User:CRCole; a.k.a. User:71.58.75.28, a.k.a. User:166.217.248.24, a.k.a. User:72.69.56.203, a.k.a. User:69.86.246.30, a.k.a. User:71.58.105.199 – has flagrantly used the Samuel Fraunces article to disseminate her theories about Fraunces’s parentage, ancestry and descendants; to discredit the documentary record and legitimate scholarship on Fraunces; to promote conspiracy theories about and imply racists motives to those with whose work she disagrees; and to promote her self-published Fraunces biography.
Where has this happened??? again here is Boring History Guy going off on anyone who tries to remove anyting he says about Fraunces.GramereC 19:08, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
Some of her most outrageous claims and accusations have been made on the talk page. But this complaint will be limited to original research added to the article. Below are some examples of original research added during periods in which she was the only editor of content:
So if we use the talk page Boring History Guy gets angry and turns everything personal.GramereC 19:08, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
All three things are true but have often been removed because YOU Boring Old History Guy say so. That is fine remove the birth certificate because the dates vary remove burials for the same reason. Which is what you do. Even when it is replaced with some other work you blank it out. GramereC 19:08, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
Again much of this was removed by Boring Old History Guy. Not corrected with any type of note added. Much of this text is not mine but is what was there to begin with by some unsigned editor who is never identified. GramereC 19:08, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
User:Tuckerresearch confronted User:GramereC on some of her most outrageous and undocumented claims. Talk:Samuel Fraunces#Edward Fraunces → Samuel Fraunces? Talk:Samuel Fraunces#What is happening?, and User:GramereC deleted the items. But how can Wikipedia tolerate this behavior? BoringHistoryGuy ( talk) 18:07, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
I think this recent round of edits can be researched on their own. Again If you are going to use other Tertiary sources such as the museum pre visit or the booklet Kym Rice did for the FTM and SR you need to look at what references they used to begin with. GramereC 19:08, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
Prime problems are representing the current building as having been there since colonial times. It was a rebuild. GramereC 19:08, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
The portrait that FTM uses was purchased at auction in 1913 and although they say it is Fraunces they offer no provenance. The only way to verify where it came from is from SR published minutes. The way the portrait is continually put up front without recognizing that there is another earlier published sketch of Samuel Fraunces provided by family. Plus written description in conflict with the description is reprehensible in that they are in need of reproof. There are other places where the documents are just as reprehensible.GramereC 19:08, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
Limiting the secondary sources acceptable in your eyes necessitate exposing the primary documents because the primary documents are in conflict. Most of these conclusions were reached many years ago. You actual took WEB DuBois statement and had it written that Fraunces had no African blood. That just is not true all anyone has to do is read the final letter in the discussion. GramereC 19:08, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
You continue to go back to Fraunces Will and you do not give a viable source to find it. Then when I place one in your text as correction you take it back out. GramereC 19:08, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
User:BoringHistoryGuy on this Samuel Fraunces article is an entire section that has NOTHING published about it. This poisoning attempt – if it occurred – would have taken place in late June 1776 at Richmond Hill, Washington's headquarters in Manhattan. The housekeeper there was a widow named Mary Smith,[85] although there were other female servants. Fraunces's tavern was about two miles away and provided catered meals for the general and his staff. The reference included here is for the wrong thing.
This Wikipedia article then goes on to argue why Lossing's story is incorrect based on the assertion that the events took place at Richmond Hill. This is original work.GramereC 01:45, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
Particularly when a response is interleaved with the complaint. Editors here will not be able to work through all of the above content disputes. The only thing that is clear is that the two editors completely disagree on the content and that they cannot communicate with each other. GramereC, you cannot insist that only your version be included in the article. User:BoringHistoryGuy is a respected editor here and seems to have very good knowledge of the general area. If you cannot reach agreement with him on what should be included in the article, or find other editors who back your version, then you just cannot force your version of things into the article. We do things by consensus here.
I strongly urge you to write up your own version of the article in your own user space, then we'll be able to properly judge both the overall content of the "two" articles and individual sentences and paragraphs. If you are only willing to give us a choice between "your article" or "his article", my feeling is that editors will choose "his article." Smallbones( smalltalk) 20:01, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
Page:
Samuel Fraunces (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
User being reported:
GramereC (
talk ·
contribs ·
deleted contribs ·
logs ·
filter log ·
block user ·
block log)
Previous version reverted to: [diff preferred, link permitted] [21]
Diffs of the user's reverts:
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [28]
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [diff] Talk:Samuel_Fraunces#Request_for_Comment, an entire section trying to deal with this over weeks and weeks. The entire thing has gone on for many months, possibly years.
Comments:
One user, an SPA who brings in OR simply will not listen to others and insists that she is the only one with a say of what is in the article
Smallbones(
smalltalk) 17:35, 4 May 2017 (UTC)