Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by RadioKirk (talk | contribs) at 18:00, 21 June 2006 (Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#General Tojo). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome!

Hello, General Tojo, 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:

• The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

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:Questions, 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!  -- GraemeL 13:15, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I noticed that you had been doing a lot of good work on Parkinson's disease and that nobody had welcomed you. Drop me a note on my talk page if you need any help. --GraemeL 13:15, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the offere and welcome --General Tojo 13:17, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Listen Keith why don't you leave the parkinson's page alone for a few days whilst I put some stuff up there, and then when I'm done you can edit to your heart's content. If you just run around reverting everything I do I'm liable to become a very unhappy wikipedian, and that wouldn't be very nice of you. --PaulWicks 14:22, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Virtually all of your amendments contain obvious errors. Some of them, such as the complete removal of all symptoms is plain vandalism. The symptoms section certainly needs reorganising. However, complete removal is not reorganisation. I checked your full details on the Internet. I was surprised to find, or maybe I wasn't that you were still a student a year ago. That naivety and newness to PD is very obvious in the alterations that you made. It looks like you don't even know basics about PD. You have ceratinly never studied biochemistry or toxicology or pharmacology. You describe psychology as an area of your expertise when all you have is a degree in it. You obviously have a very overinflated and delkuded view of your knowledge of the subject. Endless reverts are on the way, and there are plenty of people that will be assisting me. You will find that every single thing that you add (barring the freak chance of there being something useful) will have turned out to have been a complet waste of time because it will be removed in its entirety. Come back in about 20 years by when you might have got a grasp of Parkinson's Disease. --General Tojo 17:02, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

I would like to draw your attention to the following: The Three-revert rule (or 3RR) is an official policy which applies to all Wikipedians. 3RR violations are reported here.

The policy states that an editor must not perform more than three reversions, in whole or in part, on a single Misplaced Pages article within a 24 hour period. This does not imply that reverting three times or fewer is acceptable. In excessive cases, people can be blocked for edit warring or disruption even if they do not revert more than three times per day.

For the purposes of counting reverts, these are excluded:

self-reverts correction of simple vandalism. (Note that the test applied to determine simple vandalism is usually quite strict; adding or removing POV tags is not simple vandalism.) removing posts made by a banned or blocked user Using sockpuppets (multiple accounts) to avoid this limit is a violation of WP:SOCK, and the policy specifically does not apply to groups. Any reversions beyond this limit should be performed by somebody else, to serve the vital purpose of showing that the community at large is in agreement over which of two (or more) competing versions is correct

http://en.wikipedia.org/WP:3RR --PaulWicks 18:06, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

And whilst we're at it, on the subject of my credentials: http://en.wikipedia.org/WP:NPA

--PaulWicks 18:08, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

You haven't read the regulations thoroughly enough. They state : Do not revert any single page in whole or in part more than three times in 24 hours, except in the case of obvious, simple vandalism. Examples of vandalism - Blanking : Removing all or significant parts of articles. What you have done is indisputably vandalism because it does just that. If it persists I will not only revert it, I will report you directly for persistent vandalism. There is also no restriction at all on my making substantial amendments. Reverts or substantial amendments will be made on all counterproductive alterations. --General Tojo 18:27, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

You have been reported here: http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/3RR#User:General_Tojo_reported_by_User:PaulWicks

We'll let the admins deal with it. --PaulWicks 18:37, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

The administrators have already been notified of your large scale and persistent vandalism. You are attempting without good reason to decimate the Parkinson's Disease page. --General Tojo 18:40, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

If you'd like to show me where you've done that it would be very helpful. Thanks.--PaulWicks 18:42, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

You won't have to search out the administrators as they will be searching out you. --General Tojo 20:04, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

PD and civility

While I agree Paul's moves may have been a bit bold, I'm more than just slightly dismayed at your combative attitude and harsh language. Nobody benefits from this kind of behaviour. Threats (reverts for 20 years) are not beneficial. Paul's edits are not vandalism, and you should not be characterising them as such. Personal attacks are uncalled for, as are any other breaches of civility.

I have left a more general message on Talk:Parkinson's disease. Please try to collaborate. Ongoing aggression will meet with blocks from editing, and I reserve the right to administer these blocks as I do not pretend to be a party in this dispute. JFW | T@lk 00:25, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Needless to say, you should not be using sockpuppets in a revert war. These can be identified summarily through Misplaced Pages:Checkuser and may result in blocks of all accounts. JFW | T@lk 00:29, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm trying to assume good faith here, but can you please explain your reverts on transglutaminase and thyroid? These are articles I've edited recently, and in transglutaminase you removed well-referenced additions. Please do not disrupt Misplaced Pages to make a point in response to my above postings. Also make it a habit to include edit summaries, so it will be easier for other editors to understand what you're trying to achieve without having to speculate about your motives. JFW | T@lk 12:13, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

I have a very extensive knowledge of enzymes, and have written a comprehensive biochemistry on the thyroid. I consequently considered the previous versions better.It is good to start all articles with a general summary of what is to follow. The earlier version did this. --General Tojo 12:45, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

You have written above "personal attacks are uncalled for" and now write "do not disrupt Misplaced Pages to make a point" ! Aren't these two statements inconsistent ? Accusing people of disruption merely because they do not entirely agree with you sounds like a personal attack. --General Tojo 13:07, 21 June 2006 (UTC)'

I honestly don't care whether you have extensive knowledge of enzymes. Your edit on transglutaminase removed data without an explanation. Likewise you have not explained why we need a redundant paragraph on thyroid.

Please do not make the mistake of attacking the messenger. I left the above messages to inform you of well-accepted Misplaced Pages policy. If you choose to antagonise myself or other users, please be aware that this is considered WP:POINT; have you read the policy? It is not a personal attack, but a reminder. JFW | T@lk 16:44, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

An explanation has been given concwerning the thyroid, and I don't consider the passage redundant at all. Neither did the person who added it or the people that accepted its inclusion. --General Tojo 17:04, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

I've responded over there and made the necessary changes. How do you justify your edit on transglutaminase? JFW | T@lk 17:59, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#General Tojo

Upon request, I have reviewed this talk page, and I must ask that you take a giant step back from some of your stated intentions. To PaulWicks above, you have written, "Endless reverts are on the way, and there are plenty of people that will be assisting me." This can be interpreted as a call to meatpuppetry in violation of Misplaced Pages policy. Further, you state, "every single thing that you add (barring the freak chance of there being something useful) will have turned out to have been a waste of time because it will be removed in its entirety", suggesting "Wikistalking"—any edit not supported by WP:CITE is fair game for removal and/or improvement, but targeting only those edits by a single user tends to demonstrate a vindictiveness that belies our goal of collaboration. In the meantime, it is incivil—and undeniably argumentum ad hominem—to suggest that a person "ome back in about 20 years by when you might have got a grasp of Parkinson's Disease"; this reads as an invocation of your knowledge in an effort to belittle the other's. A better use of edit summaries when making edits, and a willingness to help those who may or may not share your level of knowledge, will promote collaboration rather than competition. (I should also note that the use of your knowledge in making edits and/or reversions without citation of reliable sources is considered original research and may be removed at any time.) Feel free to write me with any comments or questions. RadioKirk (u|t|c) 18:00, 21 June 2006 (UTC)