Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/Porn and BLP

Making things up

It is a shame to Scalhotrod inventing that I "was found to be disruptive in his (my) "edits". He brings no diffs to back up this statement, which is simply untrue. Scalhotrod, thouygh, has claimed it is unfair that porn is being made to be BLP compliant, so I think it is a shame he and others refuse mediation as it will force me to take this further down the road of dispute resolution. ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 02:04, 25 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

SqueakBox's evidence

This is part of the content from the now deleted User:SqueakBox/BLP

[1] Wd

[2] Wd

[3] Wd

[4] Scl

[5] Scl

[6] Scl

[7] Scl

[8] Gy

[9] Gy

[10] Cvr

[11] Cvr

[12] Ccl

--v/r - T P 06:39, 25 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Social breaching by Squeakbox

For what it's worth, I've reverted[13] an obvious social breaching exercise by Squeakbox to delete a bunch of uncontroversial sourced list items. This whole thing looks like some kind of setup. SB is advised not to make these kinds of edits while invoking process; we can wait for any issue to be decided. - Wikidemon (talk) 08:39, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's technically known as "disruption". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:57, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've self-reverted because SB has already made inapt accusations and misleading references to my edit history, and I don't want to be suckered into generating any more fodder for this. Others are welcome to take a look for themselves to see if this latest list blanking was appropriate. To me it looks like SB is doing exactly the same thing that started the AN/I thread, and that we just finished an RfC in which he was told not to do it. - Wikidemon (talk) 17:41, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't there an edit from him someplace that reads, "I don't care, I'm going to delete them." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:40, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]