I read all that whas written the last times. And the fact is this part of what should be an objective tool of discussion and knowledge has turned to be an irregular and obsessive process of destruction.
The main question is why ? One of the reasons that comes during the reading of all this exchanges is the jalousy.
I. and G. Bogdanov would be anonymous searchers somewhere in France, YBM and his friends would not spend their whole time in the temptative of ruining their work.
I. and G. studied in a proper way. They were lead by advisors. They published several articles what is one the main conditions for their work to be validated. And they obtained their thesis. This is the evident truth. The papers exist and the thesis too.
I know what you are about to say, once again : "LLL is a sock puppet". I am not, not at all. You are free to think what you want about my identity, but let me tell you that there is no debate if only one of the parts has the right to write and judge and if the other part has only the "right" to be censured and injuried. It cannot be an encyclopedia in that way but only a process.
So I propose that, as it should have been the case from the start, that NONE should be censured. If it is a real debate, all the persons of the both parts have the right to debate without being said sock puppets for example, as I was treated.
Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Regarding The Bogdanov Affair has been accepted. Please place evidence at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Regarding The Bogdanov Affair/Evidence Fred Bauder 15:32, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
Three-revert rule violation, Bogdanov Affair
Please do not keep undoing other people's edits without discussing them first. This is considered impolite and unproductive. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert an article to a previous version more than three times in 24 hours. Thank you.--NicholasTurnbull | (talk) (e-mail) (cabal) 20:22, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
Ban on editors involved in Bogdanov Affair
All user accounts used by participants in the external controversy (involving the Bogdanov Affari) are banned from Wikipedia pending resolution of this matter. The criteria for determining external involvement shall be a review of their edit history, it being presumed that if the vast majority of their edits were to the Bogdanov Affair and related pages such as this arbitration that they are not Wikipedia editors but persons involved in the external dispute. This group includes: YBM (talk · contribs), XAL (talk · contribs), ProfesseurYIN (talk · contribs), Igor B. (talk · contribs), CatherineV (talk · contribs), 18.104.22.168 (talk · contribs). Laurence67 (talk · contribs), EE Guy (talk · contribs), 22.214.171.124 (talk · contribs), 126.96.36.199 (talk · contribs), Luis A. (talk · contribs) and all others who meet the criteria. Rbj (talk · contribs), a regular Wikipedia editor, and Ze miguel (talk · contribs), a new editor who has edited other areas, are banned from editing Bogdanov Affair, pending resolution of this matter.
A less restrictive injunction Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Regarding_The_Bogdanov_Affair/Proposed_decision#Ban_on_editing_Bogdanov_Affair is under consideration and may replace the total bans. Fred Bauder 19:07, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
This account is banned
The arbitraton committee has reached a final decision in the Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Regarding The Bogdanov Affair case. →Raul654 03:35, 11 November 2005 (UTC)