User talk:Gogreenlight

Consensus
Hi,

You may want to add to the consensus regarding the contents of the article. However, it would require a considerable investment of time, and even more patience. You may not want to continue discussing either, in which case I thank you for your comments and am glad you consider the page improved.

If you have any wikipedia-related questions, I would be more than happy to answer them.

Thanks, WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules: simple/complex 11:47, 5 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Please be aware that WLU has been repeatedly blocked for violating Wikipedia policies. I'd recommend being familiar with Wikipedia policies, and not trusting advice from editors with spotty block histories.  Recently he had to retract an accusation against me when it became clear that he assumed ill will, not even having looked at my actual edit.


 * As for his offer to "add to the consensus", this is a two-editor conflict, with no consensus. With the exception of this weekend, WLU hasn't even been engaging in discussion for months - just reverting every edit that I made.  (Except for correcting his spelling errors, that is.)  Were there a real consensus, he wouldn't need to selectively contact editors and try to get them involved.  This is covered by the Wikipedia policy on  Canvassing.


 * If you would like to become involved, you might wish to spend some time learning about the Wikipedia's fringe theory policy and Blanchard's fringe theory. (WLU refers to it as Cantor's theory.  Had he taken the time to learn about it, he'd know that even Cantor doesn't claim it as Cantor's theory.)  Learning about this fringe theory might be difficult, because only Blanchard's coworkers thought it worth mentioning academically.  This is why WLU is trying to get friends involved instead of coming up with the independent sources required by Wikipedia policy.


 * Of course, since WLU is reverting every substantial edit that I make, there are other ways to get involved. He reflexively reverts all grammatical changes that I make as well.  This weekend, this included changing 'may' to 'might.'  The difference is subtle.  Wikipedia should be a place where everyone can/'might' edit, but WLU would like it to be a place where only people who agree with him 'may' edit.  One expresses capability, while the other expresses permission.  Prior to this, WLU reverted my edit to the American spelling of 'behavior.'  (Spelling on Wikipedia is a mater of consistency, and some articles do use British English.  However, they do so consistently.  For that article, that would involve 'nappies' instead of 'diapers.'  (I actually did insert the word 'nappy' not to long ago.  It was a direct quote from a book, so I didn't Americanize it.  WLU quickly deleted that too.) BitterGrey (talk) 14:44, 5 December 2011 (UTC)