User talk:Philodemous

Herculaneum papyri

Hi Philodemous. You have been making very similar changes to the article Herculaneum papyri (and to its talk page) as User:VitoMocella68 were repeatedly doing, before he was blocked (for a username violation). At the same time, there is a conflict of interest discussion concerning VitoMocella68 at the noticeboard. Do you have any conflict of interest to declare regarding these edits? —St.Nerol (talk, contribs) 21:57, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. —St.Nerol (talk, contribs) 00:08, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i don't have any conflict of interest, I followed the discussion first, and I found that a correct reconstruction is needed. However I have impression that you have a strong biased pov, for instance you insisted with En-Gedi scroll that are completely out of topic! Have you some conflict of interest? Philodemous (talk) 00:58, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, I do not have any conflict of interest regarding the scrolls. I do not know anyone that works with anything that relates to them, and I did in fact not know about their existence until I read about them in the news and on Wikipedia a few days ago. —St.Nerol (talk, contribs) 07:47, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So, Philodemous can I clarify that you are saying you have no connection at all with the editor @VitoMocella68:? And that it is just a coincidence that on the exact same day that they were advised to create a new account or user name, and then blocked from editing from that account, that you created a brand new account and starting editing the same article? And that you then added in the same content about Mocella that they had previously added and others had removed?

If it is not just the most unbelievable coincidence, and you do have some connection with Mocella, I suggest it would serve you well to be honest and transparent right now about it and we can help you find a way forward. If it turns out later that you were not telling the truth, you will most likely be banned from editing here completely. Melcous (talk) 08:07, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Melcous, I have already replied above. I started from that version because it seemed to me to be a better reconstruction, for reasons. I am not stupid, everyone minimises the work, so I made an edit and not a rewrite! Everyone has their own way of telling things, so I added some details, for example about the role of papyrologist Obbink (Dirk Obbink), which readers deserve to know and which were missing in all previous versions. Could you please at this point explain and state your connections and possible conflict of interest with the users St.Nerol, Yodin as well as with B. Seals, of whom you, Yodin and St. Nerol also seem to be a supporter? Philodemous (talk) 10:00, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]