This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Can you tell me, or point me to a summary of, what caused his banning, please? -- Anthonyhcole ( talk) 14:17, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

this may be of help. KillerChihuahua ^?!? 14:22, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Cheers. -- Anthonyhcole ( talk) 14:59, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

KillerChihuahua's link and the links given at the bottom of that section are a good start. Much of it seems to have concerned an alleged sock of FT2's that FT2 denied ownership of when he ran for a seat on the arbitration committee. Parts of the dispute took place on Wikipedia Review, where both FT2 and PD were members. I'll drop you a mail. -- J N 466 15:14, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

The manifesto probably lost him a few brownie points too. :) That's an awesome list. I don't care for his intent, but the list is a fairly nice analysis of the project's vulnerabilities. -- Anthonyhcole ( talk) 15:29, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited Mildred and Richard Loving, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mother Jones ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 04:02, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi Jayen466, Following discussions last March, I've finally got round to putting up a suggested re-write of the contents section of the above article on its Talk page. If you are still active on this topic, I'd welcome any comments or suggestions you may have. Thanks -- DaveApter ( talk) 13:15, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. J N 466 09:24, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Jayen466—I owe you an apology. I spoke in a way that you definitely did not deserve to be spoken to. I sincerely apologize, and I am embarrassed for my behavior. I crossed through my posts here and here with the hope of making amends. I respect you as an editor and it was way out of bounds for me to speak to you the way I did. Bus stop ( talk) 13:59, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

No offence taken, Bus stop; and let me assure you this ain't personal. I think some of your editing is unhelpful, but I most certainly do respect you as a person, and suspect that if I walked in your shoes, I would most probably do as you do. Kind regards. -- J N 466 14:08, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

There seems to have been repeated unreferenced recreation of this page in English perhaps on the basis of there existing an article in the German wikipedia on the same subject. It has been noted that the German article is seemingly unreferenced itself, and might perhaps qualify for deletion, depending on the deletion criteria in the German wikipedia. You know German better than I do, and I would welcome your review of the situation in both languages and any input you might be able to offer. John Carter ( talk) 00:14, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

It certainly looks unreferenced, and extremely puffy. It's also a quiet article; not much editing being done the last few years. He seems to be notable enough to have an entry in Skepdic. Will look further into it tomorrow. -- J N 466 01:50, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Looking at Google Books, there are about 100 books referring to him [1] [2] and a few dozen sources appear in Google Scholar [3] (note that most are not really serious scholarly sources though). He's a somewhat notable fringe scientist cum spiritual teacher. I'd be tempted to raise a DR, were it not for the fact that almost all of the sources (with perhaps a few very debatable exceptions like [4]) seem to be of very poor quality. -- J N 466 14:36, 22 August 2012 (UTC)