User talk:Charlesdrakew/Archives/2014/August

Warden Park School alumni
Sorry, I have no reference but I knew them all - I actually sat next to Patience in English (the lessons clearly worked better on her than me!) Posted by
 * Sorry but we cannot accept your personal observations. We have no way of knowing you are genuine even though I expect you are. Wikipedia requires everything to have published sources which can be verified.Charles (talk) 20:16, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Wtf? Living history or hidebound credentialism? I am a journalist. Shall I write a story saying "I sat next to Patience Agbabi in English' then send you a copy so you can atttribute it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alanmunro1 (talk • contribs) 20:51, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes that would do nicely but we still do not accept original research/hearsay.Charles (talk) 21:17, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Democratic use if Wikipedia
Dear Charlesdrakew, Given that Wikipedia's about page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:About states:

"Anyone with Internet access can write and make changes to Wikipedia articles, except in limited cases where editing is restricted to prevent disruption or vandalism. Users can contribute anonymously, under a pseudonym, or, if they choose to, with their real identity."

I would be grateful if you could explain just why you consider my website www.aboutdartford.co.uk to be inappropriate as an external link on the Dartford Wikipedia site?

My sole aim of making this link available is to provide further, in depth information about the town of Dartford for anyone in the world who's interested in finding out more about it.An aim I feel much in keeping with that of the Darford Wikipedia site itself. Please be assured that it's in no way whatsoever intended to be a promotional vehicle for myself or any commercial and/or promotional interests of my own. It's been developed (like Wikipedia itself) in the spirit of altruism by an actual resident of Dartford, namely yours truly.

Further, given that the Dartford Wikipedia site currently displays broken external links which I assume you were unaware of (e.g. Local History - Mark Chatwin (1997) in the Bibliography section of the page ) and have therefore not edited, I feel that just a little tolerance on your part towards reasonable and relevant contributions (which at the risk of being immodest includes my About Darford website) would not go amiss.

I't would be nice to come to an agreed understanding on this given Wikipedia is meant to be democratic.

Happy to discuss further Regards jngfletcher
 * Wikipedia is not a democracy. You have a blatant conflict of interest and your spamming will not prevail. Report me to ANI like you did before if you wish but watch out for the boomerang.Charles (talk) 21:48, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Anonymous post by rude person
Charlesdrakew.

Ref you removing my added information on D (RIFLES) Company. I was in the very unit that I added additional info about. Perhaps if you got off your high internet horse and also did a simple search on the British Army and it's units YOU'D BLOODY REALISE THIS. NOW PUT MY INFO BACK YOU UTTER MONG!!!!!!!!!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.115.103.224 (talk) 21:36, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
 * You do the search and you reference it like any other editor has to. Before that stop shouting and remain civil.Charles (talk) 08:53, 3 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Unregistered editor, please also read apostrophe. This is nearly as important as civility. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 20:32, 4 August 2014 (UTC) P.S. thank you for your service to your country. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 20:33, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Response to your last message
Charlesdrakew, In response to your comment:

"Report me to ANI like you did before if you wish"

I'm afraid I don't know what the ANI actually is, much less reported anything back to it about you or any other Wikipedia user. Please check your FACTS first before throwing about accusations such as this.

Thank you in advance for your cooperation — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jngf1 (talk • contribs)


 * I've filed an SPI on the obvious sock. Ian.thomson (talk) 14:51, 4 August 2014 (UTC)


 * He apparently filed for mediation, here. I've added my name because I'm involved and fixed the report, but feel free to ignore it. Ian.thomson (talk) 14:57, 7 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Why isn't he blocked yet?Charles (talk) 17:15, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Like the continued existence of the National Front or the Tea Party, I don't know if we'll ever understand why or how. AIV's been backlogging lately.  I reported Jngfletcher and Jngf1 before and was told they were insufficiently warned, despite both accounts having been warned more than enough and the relation between the two beng obvious enough to suggest an auxiliary rule for WP:DUCK. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:30, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Nice idea. We need to be tough on bad faith editors using Wikipedia's mediation processes manipulatively.Charles (talk) 20:33, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Formal mediation has been requested

 * Bollocks to that. We don't negotiate with COI spammers.Charles (talk) 17:11, 7 August 2014 (UTC)