Right. I've read it. I made no personal or any other kind of attack. I pointed out a breach of the rules i.e. no POV and no racism angainst peoples, countries, nations, ethnic groups etc. Pennypennypennypenny (talk) 19:00, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
- Agree with Penny that Snowded is an inveterate POV pusher. Irvine22 (talk) 19:25, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
- I notice he's removed most of your substantive comments about his behavior from his Talk page, and chooses to engage with you on rather narrow and selective grounds. It's really quite dishonest. Irvine22 (talk) 19:51, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
I can't find that. I think it might be that he re-formatted what I wrote because it came out full of empty lines after this edit conflict thing. But thanks for your interest. I'm interested in equal treatment on the wikipedia - but have seen enough of it to know that some people are more equal than others! Pennypennypennypenny (talk) 20:45, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
- This is the comment he removed from his Talk page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ASnowded&action=historysubmit&diff=351614229&oldid=351613914 He's fairly frequently accused of bullying and high-handedness: at least one other editor has done so in the past few days alone.Irvine22 (talk) 21:06, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
Please read WP:NPOV particularlyAn article should not give undue weight to any aspects of the subject but should strive to treat each aspect with a weight appropriate to its significance to the subject..
I don't know why you tell me to do this or why you believe I haven't read it. Please find someone else to give unecessary attention to on this. It's not something I want or should have to do to constantly have this off people for no reason. Pennypennypennypenny (talk) 15:59, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Discrimination by snowded against pennypennypennypenny
Please stop making general and unsupported accusations of racism on talk pages. The above policy is very clear here and continuation of such behaviour is unacceptable --Snowded TALK 22:52, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
NOTICE to fellow users: This user has already been told I cannot deal with him due to his refusal to be reasonable. You will note that he provides no details of his umpteenth complaint against me. I've no idea what he's referring to. Will users please keep an eye on his attitude to me? Thank you. Pennypennypennypenny (talk) 18:25, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
- Latest example here and this to take just two examples. If it carries on I will assemble them all and make an ANI report. All you need to do is think before you write and address content issues rather than making various accusations as to the motivations of others --Snowded TALK 18:42, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Will an experienced user please assist me with this user who has something of an obsession with me? I have not broken any rules or done anything he claims. I have bearly done *any* editing of articles since registering because he won't let me. I have only given views and suggestions on article discussion pages and he dogs me constantly. He objects to my comments about *political articles* that are no diffferent from others' comments, and he dogs my posts afterwards but *not* others who have made the same or similar points. (Although I have noticed he seems to be in heated dispute with a good few others.) He removes all my (few) edits and leaves other people's that are of exactly the same type there. He does all this obsessively appearing to do this seemingly in minutes no matter what time of day I visit here.
And now this move to... I don't know what. What is this threat? It seems to be very intimidating and unpleasant, yet he knows I'm an inexperienced user, who rarely visits and who doesn't know all these "rules" as it would takes weeks of research for me to understand them. I vist rarely and give a few comments on discusion pages and have only been going a few weeks and yet he won't leave me alone. He can't understand the difference between suggesting on an article discussion page that an article on say the BNP or SNP should mention their political criticisers' views, and "attacks" on users. ASSISTANCE PLEASE. Pennypennypennypenny (talk) 15:20, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
I've just noticed he gives in his links very selective editing for which another user has also complained about him. The first link criticises the inclusion of and the politics of a point made by an *author of a book* which is in an article. (If the author of that *book* is still alive and objects to my view he is welcome to contact me or even visit me to discuss it.) The second link involves a claim he made that I broke a rule when I *first started my editing*. He couldn't tell the difference between my comment about a view being objectionable and a personal "attack". I asked him and his friends to "point out the rule I've broken and if that's so I'll withdraw it". They didn't do so. I withdrew the comment anyway saying "I don't like to think I've hurt people's feelings and don't want to be involved in unnecesssary hassle". Yet he keeps on posting my withdrawn comment and hassling me with it. Again: ASSISTANCE PLEASE from a reasonable user. Pennypennypennypenny (talk) 15:33, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- Just stop speaking to him. Please take care as a new user you as yet don't have a grasp of wikipedia policy and guidelines. If you have any specific questions feel free to ask me for advice. Off2riorob (talk) 19:53, 4 May 2010 (UTC)