User talk:Robert C. Walker

Using this account again
This time it's because I've had several threats to take me to AE if I contribute any more to the discussion on the Morgellons talk page.

I find that any response at all in such situations just makes the situation worse. So the easiest way to avoid problems is to log out and forget about it rather than respond to the comments about me and my alleged motivations etc, or the responses on my talk page if any. I most decidedly don't want to be taken to AE - it is a very minor matter, no idea why they got so upset - and if I get another TBan it will mean I can't publicize a project proposal I want to be able to publicize in a neutral way until the TBan is over. Robert C. Walker (talk) 14:46, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Logged in here again
This time it is because I'm involved in a discussion of Buddhism and I feel it is best to log out of my main account for a couple of days to give others a chance to reply if they want to, because I did a couple of quite long posts on the Buddhism project talk page. It's much easier to not reply if I don't get any notifications if they ping me etc. I have loads of work to do anyway! Off wiki, my software etc. Robert C. Walker (talk) 02:13, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Requested topic-ban again
See diff. Joshua Jonathan  -  Let's talk!   04:39, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Microscopes need a cool head
Hi Robert,

Thanks for remaining calm despite continual provocation by the IP editor who was fanning a flamefest at Talk:Microscope. I'm just leaving this note here so that you can see that someone noticed :-] --Slashme (talk) 15:07, 16 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks, glad to hear it's appreciated. They seem to have some understanding of TEM's and SEM's - knew that SEM imaging was done using secondary electrons rather than back scattered electrons, which I didn't know (I had read the SEM article rather quickly), so I think not just a simple troll. I'm inclined to assume good faith, that it's a newbie editor who is unfamiliar with how wikipedia works, and perhaps sees the events there a bit differently, and is frustrated with how long it takes to make what seems a simple change. With specialist knowledge, they could be a valuable asset to the wikipedia if that's right, once they get used to how things are done here. Robert C. Walker (talk) 15:54, 16 April 2017 (UTC)