Revision 55529409 of "User talk:Nikitchenko/Stollery" on enwiki

== Have you even bothered to read the warnings?! What is your problem with me? ==

# The warnings were for "removing content from Wikipedia" - I wasn't even removing content I was '''adding''' a AfD template! 
# Wikipedia [[Wikipedia:Talk_page|policy states]]: ''"It is generally acceptable to remove misplaced vandalism tags, as long as the reasoning is solid."'' 
# The warnings were not valid, '''but to be sure''' I checked with an administrator.
# Why do you even care about this? Who are you and what is your problem with me? 
'''I expect an answer as I feel like you are [[Wikipedia:Harassment|wikistalking]] me.''' - '''[[User:Stollery|Glen]]''' <sup>[[User_talk:Stollery|T]]</sup> <sub>[[Special:Contributions/Stollery|C]]</sub> 03:10, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

'''You haven't even looked before making accusations? Check your facts first... mate.'''<br>
Maybe you should stop "assming" and check your facts before making unjust accusations. [[User:UNK|UNK]] is now banned as he is a sockpuppet of [[User:JimmyT|JimmyT]] a permanently banned user who made numerous personal attacks (borderline threats) repeatedly on myself and at least half a dozen users as well as legal threats. '''I''' do not need to go check anything as I was there. Do what you want but instead of hassling [[User:Wikipediatrix|Wikipediatrix]] and I again, how about checking your facts first - oh, and check what else UNK wrote on my user page as JimmyT while you're at it. Later. - '''[[User:Stollery|Glen]]''' <sup>[[User_talk:Stollery|T]]</sup> <sub>[[Special:Contributions/Stollery|C]]</sub> 03:24, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

:OK, thats fine Stollery. But removing a warnings has not any similarity to "adding AfD template." If the warning was misplaced then you could maybe remove it.  UNK did not misplace his warning, he gives his evidence right there.  Admin banned the user without any proof and now he say you can do anything to your talkpage (remove warning)?  Now I would like to end our meeting because I see you feel it is waste of your time and I also do not want to argue endlessly about these. --[[User:Nikitchenko|Nikitchenko]] 03:37, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

:You can see all of that under our contributions... something you should have done first to begin with. Until you actually know what you are talking about I'd thank you not to make contact with me again. - '''[[User:Stollery|Glen]]''' <sup>[[User_talk:Stollery|T]]</sup> <sub>[[Special:Contributions/Stollery|C]]</sub> 03:47, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

::LOL. I expect Stollery to be back VERY shortly... --[[User:Nikitchenko|Nikitchenko]] 03:56, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

===Copies from talk:Stollery for references===

And why am I involved? Involved in what? '''YOU CAME TO ME?!'''

:I have no idea.. I am talking of you getting involved with UNK.  Why did he complain of you making personal attacks? I am only responding to message from you every couple minutes and so. --[[User:Nikitchenko|Nikitchenko]] 03:44, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

::I went and looked. You call someone anal, it's a psych-oriented personal attack on a person who INSPECTING details.:) If you disagree, so be it.  All cultures have different values. Have a good day. --[[User:Nikitchenko|Nikitchenko]] 03:55, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

:::I did not call someone anal. Read it again, the click the wikilink for "this cultures" definition. Sheesh. - '''[[User:Stollery|Glen]]''' <sup>[[User_talk:Stollery|T]]</sup> <sub>[[Special:Contributions/Stollery|C]]</sub> 03:58, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

::::You suggested he was anal, a personal attack is uncivil and unnecessary for talking about contents. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AWikipediatrix&diff=46304631&oldid=46303381 --[[User:Nikitchenko|Nikitchenko]] 04:06, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

::::Just forget about it ok? It's over with. --[[User:Nikitchenko|Nikitchenko]] 04:09, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

== Warnings ==

If I am not mistaken the only other "warnings" I have ever received were from JimmyT/UNK (both the same person and he was banned for personal attacks) and I sought administrator approval before removing [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:ChrisO&diff=next&oldid=46390160 here]. Is this what are you referring to?  <sub>[[User:Stollery|ĢĿ€Ñ §τοĿĿ€Ŗγ]]</sub><sup>[[User_talk:Stollery|Ť]]</sup><sub>[[Special:Contributions/Stollery|č]]</sub>'' 22:06, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
:You think ChrisO has more authority than Wikipedia policy? --[[User:Nikitchenko|Nikitchenko]] 02:49, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

== Warning level 2; Blanking. ==

Please refrain from removing content from Wikipedia, as you did to [[:Office of Special Affairs]]. It is considered [[Wikipedia:Vandalism|vandalism]]. If you want to experiment, please use the [[Wikipedia:Sandbox|sandbox]]. Thank you. <!-- Template:Test2a-n (Second level warning) --> - '''[[User:Stollery|Gl]][[User:Stollery/Esperanza|<font color="green">e</font>]][[User:Stollery|n]]''' <sup>[[User_talk:Stollery|T]]</sup> <sub>[[Special:Contributions/Stollery|C]]</sub> 17:38, 11 April 2006 (UTC) <br clear="both">

:Sure, you can call it blanking.  I am disputing the reference, wording and OR used in the article.  I'll be taking this to RfC over the next couple days.  I'm taking the day off.  Have fun. --[[User:Nikitchenko|Nikitchenko]] 17:40, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

::I respectfully request that you please do not copy entire conversations to my page in the exactly same way JimmyT and UNK did. I can follow the conversation without you reminding me of what '''''I''''' said. Thank you. - '''[[User:Stollery|Gl]][[User:Stollery/Esperanza|<font color="green">e</font>]][[User:Stollery|n]]''' <sup>[[User_talk:Stollery|T]]</sup> <sub>[[Special:Contributions/Stollery|C]]</sub> 17:51, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

::Nikitchenko, you did not ever state the basis for your dispute and your edits are against consensus.  You of course free to pursue mediation or RfC at your whim, but I'd suggest that you attempt discussion on the [[Talk:Office of Special Affairs|talk page]] before you waste anyone elses time.  You are not following the correct procedures required before jumping into an [[WP:RFC]].  The editors here are more than willing to compromise and develop consensus for the wording in the article, but you must be willing to use the discussion page for this to work.  Simply shouting "dispute" or "POV" and running away is not appropriate.  You must ''at least'' specifically cite the basis of your dispute, so we know how to go about fixing it.  And it might also help if you provided your own suggestions for rewording the paragraph in a manner that is acceptable to you.  [[User:Vivaldi|Vivaldi]] 01:22, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

:::In my opinion, communication between us is failing and I see no point in you continuing to assert your POV upon me.  Im looking to a 3rd party to help with this dispute. --[[User:Nikitchenko|Nikitchenko]] 18:23, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

::::In my opinion, communication is not occuring at all, because you are refusing to take part in discussions.  Like for example, why did you not answer the question about "what is the basis of the dispute" on the talk page?  Why would you revert something multiple times when it is clear that you have not developed a consensus for your edits?  [[User:Vivaldi|Vivaldi]] 01:22, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

:::::First of all, I do not appreciate your accusing me of refusing to take part in discussion.  My discussion is all over the talk page of the disputed article and my specific attempt to address the issues started here[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Office_of_Special_Affairs&diff=next&oldid=47919869].  You are party to the dispute. Discussion between us failed and I see your coming to my page now as harassment. --[[User:Nikitchenko|Nikitchenko]] 04:10, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

::::::: OMG, that's exactly the words I used when falsely accused, "all over the talk pages" and that because it was true.  I was nailed for incivility,  you're doing all right [[User:Terryeo|Terryeo]] 04:40, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

::::::You have thus far refused to provide the basis of your dispute.  In your edit [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Office_of_Special_Affairs&diff=next&oldid=47919869 there] you just mention that you dispute the reference on Scarff, but you didn't give us the basis.  Do you dispute Scarff said that?  Or do you dispute what Scarff said?  This means we need to know which sentence(s) you are disputing in the article.  It appears you are trying to dispute the veracity of the claims made inside a quote, but that is innappropriate.  Wiki editors aren't supposed to independently evaluate the truthfulness of the claims inside the quote.  We just make sure it is [[WP:V|verifiable]].  You can call it "harassment" if you want, but I've been quite civil.  Since you still have refused to provide a basis for adding the "dispute" tag, I felt it necessary to discuss it here on your talk page.  [[User:Vivaldi|Vivaldi]] 09:54, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

== I immediately explained on its talk page ==

- '''''[[User:Stollery|Gl]][[User:Stollery/Esperanza|<font color="green">e</font>]][[User:Stollery|n]]''''' ''<small><sup>[[User_talk:Stollery|T]]</sup><sub>[[Special:Contributions/Stollery|C]]</sub> [[User:Stollery|(Stollery)]]</small>'' 04:58, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

: Why is it a "perfectly acceptable source" ?? --[[User:Nikitchenko|Nikitchenko]] 10:41, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked]] from editing Wikipedia under the [[Wikipedia:Three-revert rule|three-revert rule]], which states that nobody may [[Wikipedia:revert|revert]] an article to a previous version more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the ''effect'' of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you.<!-- Template:3RR --> A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=52977952&diff=next&oldid={{{2}}} link]. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. <!-- 533--> - '''''[[User:Stollery|Gl]][[User:Stollery/Esperanza|<font color="green">e</font>]][[User:Stollery|<font color="red">n</font>]]''''' ''<small><sup>[[User_talk:Stollery|T]]</sup><sub>[[Special:Contributions/Stollery|C]]</sub> [[User:Stollery|(Stollery)]]</small>'' 10:06, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Will YOU please refrain from undoing MY edits repeatedly!!! I am disputing the statement '''the organization hired private investigators, fabricated criminal charges and harassed their targets, including at their place of employment, as well as their family members.''' because the source is dubious.  Stop removing my dispute.  I should not be blocked just because you keep removing my dubious tag and I have to keep replacing it.  If Im blocked I will have to bring this up to RfC against you. --[[User:Nikitchenko|Nikitchenko]] 10:24, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

[[Image:Octagon-warning.png|left|30px| ]]You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the [[Wikipedia:Three-revert rule|three-revert rule]]. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future. <!-- Template:3RR3 --> --[[User:Samuel Blanning|Sam Blanning]]<sup>[[User talk:Samuel Blanning|(talk)]]</sup> 11:05, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

::I did discuss my changes.  Glen is the one who is out of line and I shouldn't be blocked because he kept removing my dispute. He violates wikipedia policy WP:V and WP:RS.  Look at the history. --[[User:Nikitchenko|Nikitchenko]] 11:07, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

::: Sorry, please read [[WP:3RR]], the purpose of the policy is to stop edit warring and the disruption it causes as such you are not exempted from the rule for being "right", nor does the admin imposing any block under it even try to evaluate that. If you are in a dispute with someone try more constructive ways of resolving that dispute. --[[User:Pgk|pgk]]<sup>(<font color="mediumseagreen">[[User_talk:Pgk|talk]]</font>)</sup> 11:19, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

::::I did and g0t little or no response in the mediation page over this new issue about Tory Christman being used as a source on in [[Office of Special Affairs]]. --[[User:Nikitchenko|Nikitchenko]] 19:49, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

==Blocked for 3RR again==

:See [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Office_of_Special_Affairs&action=history here] - '''''[[User:Stollery|Gl]][[User:Stollery/Esperanza|<font color="green">e</font>]][[User:Stollery|<font color="red">n</font>]]''''' ''<small><sup>[[User_talk:Stollery|T]]</sup><sub>[[Special:Contributions/Stollery|C]]</sub> [[User:Stollery|(Stollery)]]</small>'' 09:20, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
::Stollery, communication between you and I have repeatedly failed.  Please do not contact me again, if you have something to say, put it inthe mediation cabal space. --[[User:Nikitchenko|Nikitchenko]] 10:00, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

==Pending uncivility complaint to Esperanza==
Stollery who claims membership of Esperanza has proven himself to be uncivil on several occasion to me and other users.  Here is the most recent instance:[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AOffice_of_Special_Affairs&diff=52979392&oldid=52978654] Here are some past uncivil behavior: '''Judgmental tone in edit summaries:''' "...ridiculous assumption"[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Office_of_Special_Affairs&diff=47979911&oldid=47979478] Stollery vandalizes[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ANikitchenko&diff=55050285&oldid=55050157] my talk page after I already warned him to use the mediation page for contacting me. I warned him not to vandalize my page and reminded him to use the mediation page and he left another uncivil comment[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ANikitchenko&diff=55050566&oldid=55050422] --[[User:Nikitchenko|Nikitchenko]] 10:18, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

== Mediation Cabal: gathering evidence ==

I'm busy right now documenting things about the disputes. I am beginning to think the problem isn't only over my dispute at the OSA article.  There seems to be evidence about Stollery's behavior that need to be looked at. --[[User:Nikitchenko|Nikitchenko]] 10:30, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

::Now you are [[Wikipedia:Harassment|wikistalking]] both Stollery and myself.  You have certified the basis for a dispute in an RFC about the Jack Hyles related articles -- a topic for which you have absolutely reason for even thinking about.  The sole reason that you even commented at all is because you wish to spite me.  That is very petty and inappropriate behavior.  [[User:Vivaldi|Vivaldi]] ([[User talk:Vivaldi|talk]]) 14:14, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

#21 May 2006 [[Charlie Sheen]] - Stollery removes allegations backed by reliable source[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Charlie_Sheen&diff=prev&oldid=54346617] but insists allegations by unreliable source remain in his "enemies" article[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AOffice_of_Special_Affairs&diff=52942175&oldid=52858377]. --[[User:Nikitchenko|Nikitchenko]] 10:28, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
#18 May 2006 [[User:WiseOne]] Why does Stollery redirect another user's page: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:WiseOne&diff=prev&oldid=53787253] ? --[[User:Nikitchenko|Nikitchenko]] 10:50, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
#17 May 2006 [[Talk:Michael Jackson]] Stollery's POV: "It is not appropriate that the opening few lines insult the subject of the article"[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Michael_Jackson&diff=prev&oldid=53704524] --[[User:Nikitchenko|Nikitchenko]] 10:53, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
#11 May 2006 [[Scientology versus the Internet]] Vanity or spam link? : Stollery Wikilinks his own website from an article.[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Scientology_versus_the_Internet&diff=prev&oldid=52607726] --[[User:Nikitchenko|Nikitchenko]] 11:14, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
#27 December 2005 [[ScienTOMogy]] Stollery promotes his website with '''m''' to indicate a minor edit.[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=ScienTOMogy&diff=prev&oldid=32859032] --[[User:Nikitchenko|Nikitchenko]] 11:45, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
#27 December 2005 [[Jumping the couch]] Stollery promotes his website[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jumping_the_couch&diff=prev&oldid=32858056] --[[User:Nikitchenko|Nikitchenko]] 11:45, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
#9 December 2005 [[User talk:69.10.96.4]] Stollery reveals the identity (real name) of what he thinks[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:69.10.96.4&diff=prev&oldid=30697079] is the user of an IP address. If I remember correct this is against Wikipedia rules. --[[User:Nikitchenko|Nikitchenko]] 11:33, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
#9 December 2005 [[ List of Scientologists]] Stollery linkspams his vanity article [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_Scientologists&diff=prev&oldid=30694403] --[[User:Nikitchenko|Nikitchenko]] 11:28, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
#9 December 2005 [[Scientology and the legal system]] Stollery linkspams his vanity article[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Scientology_and_the_legal_system&diff=prev&oldid=30693543] --[[User:Nikitchenko|Nikitchenko]] 11:28, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

lol!!! - '''''[[User:Stollery|Gl]][[User:Stollery/Esperanza|<font color="green">e</font>]][[User:Stollery|<font color="red">n</font>]]''''' ''<small><sup>[[User_talk:Stollery|T]]</sup><sub>[[Special:Contributions/Stollery|C]]</sub> [[User:Stollery|(Stollery)]]</small>'' 11:18, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

don't vandalize my talk page Stollery.  If you have something to say put it in the mediation page. Communication between us has already failed too many times. --[[User:Nikitchenko|Nikitchenko]] 11:20, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

:Ok, why don't you? Oh yeah, you're blocked... again! - '''''[[User:Stollery|Gl]][[User:Stollery/Esperanza|<font color="green">e</font>]][[User:Stollery|<font color="red">n</font>]]''''' ''<small><sup>[[User_talk:Stollery|T]]</sup><sub>[[Special:Contributions/Stollery|C]]</sub> [[User:Stollery|(Stollery)]]</small>'' 11:22, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

I've only begun my search and already found problems with Stollery. Who knows what I'll find as I continue through his history :) Best way to spend my free time while being blocked! --[[User:Nikitchenko|Nikitchenko]] 11:30, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Stollery vandalizes my talk page (harrassment) and presents uncivil attitude towards me, 20 minutes go by with no activity from Stollery and then he goes to Jimbo wales page to do this:[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&diff=prev&oldid=55052103]. Hmmm. :) --[[User:Nikitchenko|Nikitchenko]] 11:51, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Interesting that Stollery has special links in his user page to monitor me and Terryeo.  Probably because we're scientologists. --[[User:Nikitchenko|Nikitchenko]] 11:51, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

:I can answer your second question after careful and thorough research (i.e. reading the edit summary of the diff you linked to). Glen accidentally posted a warning on a user's userpage instead of his talk page, and moved the userpage to his talkpage with the 'move' button rather than doing a cut and paste. That created the redirect. --[[User:Samuel Blanning|Sam Blanning]]<sup>[[User talk:Samuel Blanning|(talk)]]</sup> 13:53, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

:''Probably because we're scientologists.''  Probably because you both push your POV in ways that are strictly and expressly prohibited by Wikipedia policy and repeatedly insist that you don't comprehend how Wikipedia policy actually works so that you can claim that you're "acting in good faith" when you violate the rules.  I mean, look at the current mediation case which only exists because you ''still'' purport to believe that the {{tl|dubious}} tag exists for you, a Wikipedia editor, to communicate to the reader your personal judgements about whose statements you believe.  That case has been going on for a month and a half and you're still trying to assert that you don't comprehend the policy that is the fundamental basis of the case. -- [[User:Antaeus Feldspar|Antaeus Feldspar]] 14:37, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

::More Uncivil communication from Antaeus. Antaeus doesn't provide any evidence that "push my POV" and his opinin that I am "trying to assert that <nowiki>[I]</nowiki> don't comprehend the policy" is also incorrect. I don't like the way Antaeus tries to make his opinion as if he is an authority. I only dispute the reliability of Tory as a source. --[[User:Nikitchenko|Nikitchenko]] 18:37, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you Sam and Antaeus. I'll comment on the preposterously ludicrous allegations made by Jimmy, oops sorry UNK, oops sorry, I mean; "Joschka":

#Read your claims again: ''"Stollery removes allegations backed by reliable source but insists allegations by unreliable source remain in his "enemies" article"'' - seriously mate, the '''question''' (note question - not claim nor allegation - QUESTION) has to be asked are you on drugs?! Where did I claim:<br>'''a)''' that the source was unreliable or <br>'''b)''' claim allegations remain in my '''ENEMIES''' article?!<br>Did you read the article's [[Talk:Charlie_Sheen|discussion page?]] Did you read through [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Charlie_Sheen&action=history the history?] Did you conduct ANY research before making these unfounded, completely false and defamatory allegations?! The answer: '''AN ABSOLUTE AND UNEQUIVOCAL NO'''. The parts removed from the article were removed '''BY CONSENSUS''' (which is why they haven't been reverted) because they are simple allegations and do not deserve to be in an article as if stated as fact. My suggestion would be that perhaps anyone making these claims should maybe learn to read, or word clear their vocab, (no allegations made) huh??
#Read Sam's answer above. Yes after his exhaustive "research" he managed to determine the exact reason as to why the change was made. Perhaps anyone making these claims should learn to utilize a brain cell or two? (no allegations make)
#'''''DID YOU EVEN READ THE PAGE???''''' Here, try again:<br>[[Image:mikejack.jpg]]<br>You see Jimmy, this is a talk page - for DISCUSSION. I am not pushing my POV, rather putting it up FOR DISCUSSION. Perhaps anyone making these claims should learn to grasp these BASIC concepts before commenting okay??? (no allegations made)
#How can it be a ''spam link'' when it is not an external link at all but rather a wikilink to another wikipedia article about a related scientology vs. the internet article? If it was spam why has it not been reverted? Anyone making these claims to discredit me equates to be somewhat laughable... is the seriously the best you could do?
#Again. Anyone making these claims is truly pathetic (no allegations made). This is again an '''''entirely appropriate link''''' to a news source with an article totally related to the article in question. If this is the best you can do then I'm a happy man. SIX MONTHS LATER AN NOBODY HAS REVERTED THE LINK? Why is only you that has a problem with this buddy boy???
#Have you even looked at this article??? What does the opening paragraphs say?<br><blockquote>''When Cruise engaged in some sofa stomping, he coined a new phrase called '''jumping the couch''' - the defining moment when someone has gone of the deep end.''</blockquote>How is that unrelated to an article on "jumping the couch''? I know English isn't your first language but SERIOUSLY!! (no allegations made)
#Actually Paul's a good friend of mine and again, your attempts to discredit me are a testimony to your отсутсвие сведении (никакие заявления не сделали)
#See 4 and 5 above
#And again. Try again my friend... this was comical at best.
- '''''[[User:Stollery|Gl]][[User:Stollery/Esperanza|<font color="green">e</font>]][[User:Stollery|<font color="red">n</font>]]''''' ''<small><sup>[[User_talk:Stollery|T]]</sup><sub>[[Special:Contributions/Stollery|C]]</sub> [[User:Stollery|(Stollery)]]</small>'' 16:22, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

:Stollery includes '''incivility''' with his rebuttal. --[[User:Nikitchenko|Nikitchenko]] 18:37, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

===Response to Stollery===
#''"Stollery removes allegations backed by reliable source but insists allegations by unreliable source remain in his "enemies" article"'' Stollery answered with incivility and ask me where he claimed the source was unreliable, I never wrote that Stollery claimed they are unreliable. I only say he removed claims provided with a reliable source[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Charlie_Sheen&diff=prev&oldid=54346617]
#He can revert, instead of redirecting other users pages.
#Stollery's POV: "It is not appropriate that the opening few lines insult the subject of the article"[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Michael_Jackson&diff=prev&oldid=53704524]
#Stollery Wikilinks his own website from an article.[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Scientology_versus_the_Internet&diff=prev&oldid=52607726].  Stollery's includes "Anyone making these claims to discredit me equates to be somewhat laughable... is the seriously the best you could do?" in his response. Incivility.  And he claims to be an Esperanza member.
#Stollery promotes his website's article with '''m''' to indicate a minor edit.[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=ScienTOMogy&diff=prev&oldid=32859032] His response included: "Anyone making these claims is truly pathetic (no allegations made)." More incivility from an user who claim he is Esperanza.
#Stollery promotes his website[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jumping_the_couch&diff=prev&oldid=32858056]. His edit was to an article about his website. Stollery response includes "I know English isn't your first language but SERIOUSLY!! (no allegations made)". More incivility from a user to says he is Esperanze.
#I don't know that person is a good friend of Stollery...
#Stollery linkspams his vanity article [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_Scientologists&diff=prev&oldid=30694403] his response is to refer me to his incivil responses.
#Stollery linkspams his vanity article[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Scientology_and_the_legal_system&diff=prev&oldid=30693543]. His response "try again" and calls me a friend but he does not treat me like friends but with incivility and drag me into revert wars.
:--[[User:Nikitchenko|Nikitchenko]] 18:49, 26 May 2006 (UTC)