Misplaced Pages

User talk:Edwardlucas: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 01:39, 1 November 2006 editBwithh (talk | contribs)14,830 edits Revert odd "archiving"/removal of text - this is likely to be confusing for Edward Lucas← Previous edit Revision as of 17:06, 21 December 2006 edit undoPetri Krohn (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users37,089 editsm On the Estonia/Amnesty article: + link to articleNext edit →
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 103: Line 103:
==Misplaced Pages dispute resolution processes== ==Misplaced Pages dispute resolution processes==
Hi Edward, I haven't been following the exchanges on this page, but just to let you know that Misplaced Pages has some dispute resolution processes in place, should you want to refer to them. Please see ]. all the best, ] 23:36, 22 October 2006 (UTC) Hi Edward, I haven't been following the exchanges on this page, but just to let you know that Misplaced Pages has some dispute resolution processes in place, should you want to refer to them. Please see ]. all the best, ] 23:36, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

== On the Estonia/Amnesty article ==

When first reading the on the ''Economist'' web page, I did not know about their policy of publishing all material anonymously. <s>Most</s> All papers I read print the name of the author, be it regular staff or an outside contributor. In case of opinions, a picture of the writer is usually included with the text. Also, on the web version it is difficult to know, in what role the material appeared in the printed edition, was it ], an ], ] material, a ], or a ].

On first reading I assumed that the piece was a ], most likely by ]. I was baffled by the fact that I did not find the name of the author anywhere. Some more searching pointied to your blog.

Two questions on the article:
#What made me assume it was a letter to the editor was partly in the wording. You write ''"In 1990, before the final Soviet collapse, '''your''' correspondent tried to buy postage stamps in Tallinn using halting Estonian".'' Does ''your correspondent'' refer to ''The Economist''? If so, why not say "''our'' correspondent"?
#The text sound very much like ] (my first guess for authorship). On your blog I see that you in fact interviewed Mart Laar the same week you wrote the Amnesty piece. I know you subscribe to the views presented and, as you said, are "proud" of the text. I must still ask, is the wording and the opinions and views all your own and original, or did you get inspiration from Mart Laar?

-- ] 14:48, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

== Right to privacy ==

I believe journalist have a ], even if they have a Misplaced Pages article. I do however feel that I must defend my edits. (If only on the ''principle'', that I believe subjects should not be allowed to influence or dictate the content or "tone" of their articles.)

What you are asking for is that the article be expanded.
For me to do this, would require that I study your journalistic and personal history.
If I ''knew'' that you were notable, I would have no problem with this. If I have to do this, not because of your notability, but because of my desire to defend my edits, the situation is different. In fact I am uncomftable with this, as it feels like stalking the subject and a fellow Wikipedian.

The simplest solution is of course that you refrain from editing ]. Please post your objections on talk pages. I might even consider deleting the article because of lack of notability. (I do however believe that the three ''The Economist'' articles mentioned make you notable.) Also your family tree is interesting, although I do not know if you approve of it being included in the article. -- ] 16:52, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

'''P.S.''' Are you also known as ]? He started editing from ] the same day you arrived in ]. Please log in the next time. -- ] 16:52, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Revision as of 17:06, 21 December 2006

Hello, Edwardlucas, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  Mieciu K 18:59, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

ICDISS

After reading your excellent reporting and looking at the talk page, I have not only tagged it as a hoax, I have decided we must delete the article.

I hope you don't feel that your work on this article is getting flushed away or something like that; if any other editor here had done the same work you did, the same thing would have resulted. On behalf of the Misplaced Pages community, and as a former and sometime journalist myself, thank you very much for your work verifying this (and please do stick around if you can!) Daniel Case 02:52, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

AFD

Hi Edward, thanks for your investigative journalism. If you have comments on whether the article on the ICDISS should be kept or deleted, you should take part in the discussion here: http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/International_Council_for_Democratic_Institutions_and_State_Sovereignty

Although you are a new user, this does not mean your opinion will be discounted in the discussion. (It would be best to sign in with your user account, rather than an IP address though; and someone might ask you to prove you are who you are. You might also take a look at these pages: WP:V, WP:OR, WP:RS, WP:ORG, WP:NN to help you frame your arguments.). Hope that helps Bwithh 13:49, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

phone number

Out of curiosity, I looked at the discussion page for ICDISS... mostly to see if there were any response to the economist article. I have to say, I think it is wonderful that you were contributing, and it truly surprised me (most, in my experience) would use such a thing as evidence of why wikipedia is "bad")...however, I just thought I might point out that the discussion page links to one particular user page many times (a page with your phone number on it). One that I was also prompted to look at, out of curiosity. Anyway, I just wanted to point out that others may be equally curious and then would also come across your number. Perhaps you have already thought of this, and it's not a problem. I just wanted to give you a heads up. just in case. Novium 18:30, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

ICDISS again

I was just reading through my Economist backlog and noticed your article, and as any Economist article which mentions Misplaced Pages, I thought it would be useful to see how it has changed since a major publication mentioned it.

I thought you'd find the following two discussions interesting:

Further, on user page Liliana Dioguardi page you wrote: "I apologise if my technical incompetence meant that the message never reached you--it seems to have been deleted." I used my wiki-expertise to review the history and thought you may find it interesting to know that your message was deleted by none other but that user (Liliana) herself (http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:Liliana_Dioguardi&diff=prev&oldid=67504498).

Take care,-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  16:31, 3 October 2006 (UTC)


from Edward

Thanks very much to all these contributors. I am very much a novice at this, having been born about 20 years too early to have a natural feel for html or wikis. However, I will no doubt improve. I have followed the discussions mentioned with interest. I don't mind people having my mobile phone number--nobody has ever abused it and I think journalists should try to be as accessible as possible.

I am glad to have it confirmed that Lilian Dioguardi deleted my message herself! I thought that was the case but I was worried I was being paranoid.

I am glad that the ICDISS article has not been deleted although I didn't vote in the poll as I felt somehow I ought to stay independent. It seems to me that so long as they have their website up and running, wikipedia performs a public service in telling people the rest of the story (or at least some of it)

My investigations on this are continuing and I hope to have more to add at a later date.

Many thanks indeed for the advice and encouragement Edward

Hellow Eduard (may I call you Eduard?). I`m a Romanian wikipedia user, and I have an interest in the wikipedia article Transdniester, and especially the contributions of user William Mauco (and his sockpuppets: User:Jallor, User:WTP, etc). I would kindly ask if you to can keep a constant flow of info on your wikipedia talk page about your current investigation and of the matter of contacts with William Mauco. Not disclosing inside and hard-worked info or anything like that, but just to make an idea where are you going for with your article, and why your interest in Mauco. For example, is there any connection between ICDISS (and implicitly the websites pridnestrovie.net, tiraspoltimes.com and visitpmr.com) and William Mauco? Regarding your remark that you were worried that you were paranoid: it kinda happens on wikipedia. I apparently suffer from the same problem according to Mauco... Speaking of ICDISS and Mauco, I asked him to tell us for example where does he work (what institution or company). Or what is with his anti-C.I.A. remarks (see this monolog and this comment at the end of the article). Or how does he explain the the three sites he zealosly supports, all have the same IP adress and the same registrant (ICDISS). He skildfully evaded the questions (like he did with the rest) and sayd that I`m paranoid and a conspiracy theorist.... Anyway, I hope you understood my intentions, and I hope hearing from you soon. Have a good day. Greier 19:07, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
P.S. Mauco claims to have previously conversed with you (an "intelligent discussion" as he calls it), and that he totally made it clear to you who he is and what are his purposes. He claims to have been something of an "eye opener" for you. Is that true? Greier 19:11, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
P.S.2 Yesterday, just an hour and a half after I left a message on his talk page, Mauco suddendly camed back from his "wikibreak"... :D... While that may be just a coincidence, you should know that his first edit was to delete your attempts to contact him (simmilar conduct to that of Liliana Dioguardi)... I was wondering, did you ywo worked it up? Did you managed to contact him in the end? Or is he ignoring you, or like it happens here a lot, he gives you totally irrelevant, dust in the eyes, evazive answers? Greier 08:11, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
Greier is misrepresenting my words, which I will be need to repost in full if there is any Misplaced Pages point to be made in this polemic. Otherwise, take it off Misplaced Pages as per WP:NPA policy which all of us, including EdwardLucas and Greier, must abide by for all posts stored on this server. He is also misrepresenting my edit and is overall just trolling. - Mauco 14:36, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
Missinterpreting you words? How so, since you didn`t answer anything. All you do, all the time, everywhere, is to give blurry, totally off-topic, divertionist answers... Greier 13:30, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi Greier

Thanks for this. I don't want to be paranoid but I would like to be sure that Mauco is indeed the neutral outside expert that he would like to appear. I referred to him favourably in an entry on my blog, http://edwardlucas.blogspot.com/2006/08/gotcha-2.html but when I asked a colleague to review all the work I had done, he noted that I had taken Mauco on trust.

There have also been some queries on Misplaced Pages from you and others.

The problem is that Mauco says he will let his identity be verified if and only if his critics also produce (to me and to him) their "real world" identities. The problem is that I have no particular reason for worrying about his critics, whereas I have to some extent given him a bit of credibility, which he has used by citing me.

I have no reason to believe that there is anything sinister about Mauco and the tone of our e-mail exchanges was friendly and professional. However I am increasingly worried about what appear to me to be his evasive behaviour over the issue of verification. (I have sent him a scanned copy of my own passport so I am not trying to apply double standards).

My current suggestion to him is that we find a mutually acceptable real-world intermediary who will verify Mauco's identity and let me know that it all stands up (ie that he is not Megan Stephenson, Des Grant, or some other non-neutral figure). I will let you know what happens. But as things stand I am not happy.

Regards EdwardEdwardlucas 09:58, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Edward, I have a problem that you use a public venue to characterize my participation in our exchanges as "evasive". This is absolutely not the case, as our email exchanges clearly show. This is the sort of comment which is not true and can only serve to sever our good relations and whatever collaboration we have had in the past. I am seriously re-evaluating my previous assessment of you now, based on your mischaracterization and your reply to a known Misplaced Pages troll and previously blocked/banned vandal (Romanian ultranationalist Greier). - Mauco 14:47, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
May I also call everyone's attention to WP:UP - Mauco 02:36, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

I guess Mr. Mauco deleted a link to his article on tiraspoltimes.com when he added his last comment. Is he affraid of something? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.252.4.21 (talkcontribs)

No, absolutely not. The link to the guest column is here: However, anonymous and unsigned commentary which doesn't deal with Misplaced Pages editing can (and should) be routinely removed by editors, as per the WP:UP rules. In this particular case, the poster is a known employee of the U.S. Embassy in Chisinau, Moldova, who in the first case was using his private Internet connection. He then added the latest comment while at work, using his U.S Embassy work Internet connection. I am not sure what his innuendo is meant to achieve, but I am certain that it is not related to any collaborative Misplaced Pages efforts. As such, it is in breach of what we are trying to achieve in this encyclopedia. - Mauco 14:14, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Now, please convince me that you are not connected with the guys from ICDISS. I guess you know about me without my formal introductions and you know it from ICDISS guys. You wrote "a known employee of the U.S. Embassy". Well, thank you. I am flattered that you consider me so important. A known U.S. Embassy Employee using his private connection

Don't know where this polemic is going, but it has nothing to do with specific Misplaced Pages editing. I quote from the guidelines: Remember that article talk pages are provided to coordinate the article's improvement, not for engaging in discussion for discussion's sake. Do not use them as a discussion forum. I add that this includes user pages, see WP:UP. So I will not add more fuel to the fire by responding to the anon poster above. I will merely add that his edit record is public, can be accessed through the logs, and then via an IP trace. I was not the user who pointed out that he is using the connection of the US Embassy. I am merely quoting the findings of another registered Misplaced Pages editor (which he posted in public on this site) and noting that his edits violate Misplaced Pages rules. A look on the Talk page for that IP will also show that I am not the only one who is worried about this sort of vandalizing. It is then easy to check the hours, correlate them with working hours in Chisinau, and determine when the United States government employee is at home and when he is at work in the Embassy. It is also telling that tries to sow doubts about me, based on "more of the same", while at the same time not denying that he is an employee of the US Embassy in Chisinau, Moldova. - Mauco 13:48, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
You are such a hypocrite Mauco. Stop interpreting wikipedia rules as it suits you. No way does WP:UP requires users to delete edits from other users, may them be anonymous, embassy employee, or anything, especially since this is not your talk page. You constantly do this (one e.g.; see also how a new sock of Mauco removed my attempt to cantact you Edward ). How do you have the audacity to demand others to respect WP:RPA, to act based on your subjective interpretation of that rule, while at the same time calling me a banned ultranationalsit troll here and all other articles? The "no personal attacks" rule is valid only incomod question are addreses to you, right? Can`t you put two plus two? How come I can edit if I am banned? How come I my only edits are on talk pages if I am an ultranationalist? How come I don`t spend 24/7 editing my POV like you do? Probably because I am not an ultranationalist, and beacuse I don`t do that for a living as you do... Greier 13:30, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
It might be time to look up the word "troll"? While you are at it, please look up WP:UP, WP:TALK and WP:NPA. Then continue being uncivil if you want more of your entries deleted, or if you want to incur further blocks. As this Romanian user's block log shows, Greier have been banned in the past by Misplaced Pages for similar behavior. Your continued claims of sockpuppetry, linking me to a slew of Misplaced Pages editors who simply don't agree with you, are wrong. Instead of accusing me in public of using sockpuppets in violation of Misplaced Pages policy, please file a formal RCU. That will determine the issue. - Mauco 13:48, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
"As this Romanian user's block log shows, Greier have been banned in the past by Misplaced Pages for similar behavior." A new spalsh from Mauco... And what am I supposed to do now? Demand you to demonstarate that is was exactly the same (??? whatever that means???) behaviour that got me banned? Well explain! Where did that happened??? How is that???? Define "simmilar"! And have you noticed that your anwser didn`t even addresed the subject I was trying to develop?!?!?!? Speaking of behaviour and blocking, remember that two months ago I was temporarily blocked for 3RR, when I tried to edit your P.O.V.-ish edits regarding the history of Transdniester: you know, your slavs vs. non-slavs vision (that of Moldovans vs. Slavs, not that of Moldovans, Ukrainians and Russians), and the historical ethnic composition (that which claimed .that the "Slavs" where the majoritary element.). And it looks like afterall, it was my version which was the correct one... Accusing you of sockpuppetry? Well how else do you explain all of those anons and fresh users which pop all the time, either to vote, or either to start a conversation with you, a conversation from which others were supposed to lear the truth. How come edits like this one suddendly appears, as you give you the opportunity to give answers like this one. And how come your answer was surprisingly identical to a comment found on here, where the author also emphasizes the supposed NPOV of the Pridnestrovie.net, visitPMR.com and TiraspolTimes.com. And how come those sites are exactly the ones you support, and how come they are all ICDISS made-driven-owned-oriented? How come? Request RCU for you? Well, remember that I told you that you could solve all problems by wilingly allowing a IP check? Misplaced Pages allows users to do that, as to avoid things like the one that`s happening here right know. Why did you ignored me? What have I been asking you for like ten times already: please tell me for whome do you work for, and what exactly is your deal with Transdniester afterall? Why do you attempt to present me as some kind of troll? All I did was to ask Eduard some information which you deliberately didn`t answer to, even though I asked you those questions several times. My demand to Edward had as consequence: 1. yet another fresh users deleted my edit 2. I was accused of being a banned, ultranationalist editor. Now judge, who is the real troll? Greier 14:47, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
I hate to bait a troll, so I will merely point out that you are of course aware that all of this violates WP:UP, WP:TALK and WP:NPA. It is not my custom to enforce these policies on the user pages of others, but do you be afraid if someone else blanks you, like they have done in the past. Both here and elsewhere. - Mauco 15:01, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

more from Edward

Hmm I am not sure to be flattered or horrified that this page has become the site of such a violent exchange. Mauco, I am sorry if I have offended you. Let's continue this off-page if you will answer my email (the one about finding a trusted intermediary for the purpose of verification). I have no idea who Grier is so I plead ignorance to the charge of trollery. It does seem to me a weakness of the whole wiki approach that whereas some people can pretend to be anyone they like, others are real people from the real world. I am firmly in the latter camp, and I suggest it would improve the quality of debate if others did the same.

In the meantime, may I also appeal that everyone uses civil language?

Regards Edward

Apology accepted. Your page, in its current version, is in violation of several already-listed Misplaced Pages policies. I normally don't blank anyone (it gives the wrong impression), but anyone who wants to can do it now and be in the right. Greier has been banned more times than I can count for his provocations, as his block log shows.
I have some concerns, which I have expressed on this page, and they have caused me to re-evaluate my previous assessment of you. I don't think that I will be interested in providing you with any more background information or research in the future, and I will probably need to publish our email exchanges in full if I feel that you continue to mischaracterize what is contained in them. The information which I have scanned for you will of course be provided to you as promised, as soon as I get what I've requested from the other party. - Mauco 22:35, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages dispute resolution processes

Hi Edward, I haven't been following the exchanges on this page, but just to let you know that Misplaced Pages has some dispute resolution processes in place, should you want to refer to them. Please see WP:DR. all the best, Bwithh 23:36, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

On the Estonia/Amnesty article

When first reading the Estonia article on the Economist web page, I did not know about their policy of publishing all material anonymously. Most All papers I read print the name of the author, be it regular staff or an outside contributor. In case of opinions, a picture of the writer is usually included with the text. Also, on the web version it is difficult to know, in what role the material appeared in the printed edition, was it news, an editorial, op-ed material, a column, or a letter to the editor.

On first reading I assumed that the piece was a letter to the editor, most likely by Mart Laar. I was baffled by the fact that I did not find the name of the author anywhere. Some more searching pointied to your blog.

Two questions on the article:

  1. What made me assume it was a letter to the editor was partly in the wording. You write "In 1990, before the final Soviet collapse, your correspondent tried to buy postage stamps in Tallinn using halting Estonian". Does your correspondent refer to The Economist? If so, why not say "our correspondent"?
  2. The text sound very much like Mart Laar (my first guess for authorship). On your blog I see that you in fact interviewed Mart Laar the same week you wrote the Amnesty piece. I know you subscribe to the views presented and, as you said, are "proud" of the text. I must still ask, is the wording and the opinions and views all your own and original, or did you get inspiration from Mart Laar?

-- Petri Krohn 14:48, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Right to privacy

I believe journalist have a right to privacy, even if they have a Misplaced Pages article. I do however feel that I must defend my edits. (If only on the principle, that I believe subjects should not be allowed to influence or dictate the content or "tone" of their articles.)

What you are asking for is that the article be expanded. For me to do this, would require that I study your journalistic and personal history. If I knew that you were notable, I would have no problem with this. If I have to do this, not because of your notability, but because of my desire to defend my edits, the situation is different. In fact I am uncomftable with this, as it feels like stalking the subject and a fellow Wikipedian.

The simplest solution is of course that you refrain from editing Edward Lucas (journalist). Please post your objections on talk pages. I might even consider deleting the article because of lack of notability. (I do however believe that the three The Economist articles mentioned make you notable.) Also your family tree is interesting, although I do not know if you approve of it being included in the article. -- Petri Krohn 16:52, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

P.S. Are you also known as User:80.235.66.37? He started editing from Estonia the same day you arrived in Tallinn. Please log in the next time. -- Petri Krohn 16:52, 21 December 2006 (UTC)