Talk:Sappho: One Hundred Lyrics

Classical Greece and Rome Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Poetry Low‑importance

	Poetry portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poetry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of poetry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoetryWikipedia:WikiProject PoetryTemplate:WikiProject PoetryPoetry articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Vandalism?

Beetstra does not like the way external links are displayed in this article, and so has taken it upon himself to start editing them out. In the process, he is making whatever other changes he feels like, as well. Paragraph 2, "Sappho was an Ancient Greek poet ... fragments of some of her poems" is cited to, ""Sappho," Academy of American Poets, Poets.org, Web, May 20, 2011." At 6;21, on May 21 (ie, the day after that cite was added), Beetstra removed that cite and subtituted a "Citation needed" tag. His reason: "Reverted edits by George Dance to last version by SmackBot." (edit 430152973). No doubt he means well, but how is this distinguishable from vandalism? George Dance (talk) 16:40, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

George Dance has been blocked. Span (talk) 23:38, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Spanlej's friend Dirk Beetstra's reply to this message was to call me a spammer and to block me from posting to Wikipedia. George Dance (talk) 06:09, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

George Dance, 'Beetstra does not like the way external links are displayed in this article' .. No .. it is not how we externally link, see WP:EL, WP:NOT, etc. etc. You have been told numerous times what the problem was, it is not that I don't like it.

My original edit here stated 'remove self-ref' and is as such recognisable as not being vandalism. Wikipedia is not a reliable source, and hence, can not be used as a reference. As we can not leave references like that stand (well, basically, they are useless, they do not provide required proof for the statement; see WP:V and WP:RS), I replaced it with a request for a better reference. You later replaced it with a better reference (well .. diff), which I removed in reverting (the edit you cite above), and subsequently re-added (see diff (note that your subsequent edit here does actually not do what you think you do ..). Please be careful with what you call vandalism, and ask for clarification if you don't understand what is going on. Moreover, my initial post did not call you a spammer, read what it exactly says ("Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. It is considered spamming ...". --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 07:36, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]