User talk:Technocrate~enwiki

Edits on Technocratic movement
Please take care when making modifications to the Technocratic movement article. It is currently under heavy dispute with regards to sources and terminology and it is appreciated if you could make suggestions on the Talk:Technocratic_movement page before commencing with edits. Also, please be aware of Three-revert_rule so that you aren't given a hard time by anyone over policy. Thanks! --77siddhartha 05:07, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

I would suggest that this user is not involved in discussion as Siddhartha says. Also I would suggest that this user not repeatedly do the same things over and over, when new information and discussions are making this page take shape.(skip sievert 05:56, 19 June 2007 (UTC))


 * Well contrary to the above, I'd say good job Technocrate. You've managed to revert Skip's edits quite quickly, takes a bit of stress off me. Although you should probably be a bit more careful in editing and you should always give a reason for reversions in the edit summary, even though it may seem pointless as it's already been talked about endlessly. You should also try to get involved in the discussion page rather than being a bystander. --Hibernian 17:44, 19 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Well he is working in the team cabal from NET as you are. He is not even a player here but a soldier that reverts any and everything. Your endorsement of him says volumes about you Hibernian (skip sievert 18:04, 19 June 2007 (UTC))

Please do not remove information on Willard Gibbs from the Technocracy movement article. That information is documented here. http://www.technocracy.org/origins-1.htm The Origins of Technocracy as well as here http://www.technocracy.org/Archives/History%20&%20Purpose-r.htm History and Purpose of Technocracy skip sievert 13:20, 3 December 2007 (UTC)


 * It is noted Technocrate that a page that you restored related to Technocracy issues is slated for deletion. Anticipatory democracy Since it does not seem to be well regarded it probably is not a good Wiki link to maintain in connection to the subject. skip sievert (talk) 23:31, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Technocrate please do not re add the Anticipatory democracy link. It does not reflect ideas considered about Technocracy issues. Here is a video of Howard Scott explaining that Gibbs was the intellectual forefather of Technocracy and that it is not democratic http://www.technocracy.org/origins-1.htm The Origins of Technocracy Please watch it. Do not confuse the Gibbs article when information is available from a number of sources as to the inspiration being Gibbs for Technocracy. Thankyou. skip sievert (talk) 17:55, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Technocrate it has been suggested that you are editing without using the talk pages of articles to explain your edits. You have put up a link to this site Anticipatory democracy several times on the Technocracy page. That information really does not fit the topic, and it has been suggested that whole article should be deleted. skip sievert (talk) 07:00, 11 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Here is a video of Howard Scott explaining that Gibbs was the intellectual forefather of Technocracy and that it is not democratic http://www.technocracy.org/origins-1.htm The Origins of Technocracy Please watch it. Please do not put the citation in the Gibbs article again. This information is also located here http://www.technocracy.org/Archives/History%20&%20Purpose-r.htm

History and Purpose of Technocracy skip sievert (talk) 03:40, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Technocrate you do not seem interested in cooperation on the Technocracy movement article. Labeling me or Hibernians edits as vandalism does not make sense. You have never posted on the talk page. Please leave the current link up also that you have taken down http://technatedesign-tnat.blogspot.com/ The North American Technate TNAT It is an information site and part of the movement as is NET in the external links. skip sievert (talk) 19:27, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

"Vandalism"
Hi there. Just to let you know, vandalism is a very specific (and charged) term on Wikipedia. While you may disagree with Skip, it's inappropriate to refer to each of his edits as vandalism.-Wafulz (talk) 23:51, 7 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi Wafulz,


 * Yeap, I understand. However, as it says vandalism “is any addition, removal, or change of content made in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia.” Is not deliberately altering an article to insert POV as a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia? I would argue so as I see no evidence either within Wikipedia or externally that this guy wishes to actually make a serious positive contribution to either Wikipedia or technocracy. His behaviour seams to me to be consistent with someone attempting to cause trouble.  Inserting POV compromises the  integrity of Wikipedia. Thus, I would argue that the editing in question can be classified as vandalism.  Technocrate (talk) 18:22, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Look Technocrate it is pretty well established that you are Isenhand or Dr. Andrew Wallace. You used to edit the article under that name. You formed a group to control the article from Network of European Technocrats. You wrote a book concerning Technocracy and have a lot riding on your view. It has been mentioned that slowly but surely most of my edits have been adopted to form the Technocracy movement article because they are objective and accurate. It is not my so called point of view. I would say that you are violating wiki policy in the sense that you are here to promote your business interests in selling your book and calendars. http://web.telia.com/~u11319012/index.htm Andrew Alexander Wallace http://www.lulu.com/content/750510 Technocracy: Building a new sustainable society for a post carbon world by Andrew Wallace (Book) in Engineering I think that is the real reason you are changing these edits. Because some of them contradict your self published book. I would note that it is not to late to contribute in a constructive way to the article mentioned. That means commenting and discussing things on the talk page. You have not done that. Calling names is really inappropriate and sets a poor tone. You may as well go back to your Isenhand handle here and stop pretending. I will work with you to improve the article, but it does no good to quote two fiction books on the subject and neglect the actual information put out by the organization. Here is an information site you may or may not be interested in. http://technatedesign-tnat.blogspot.com/ The North American Technate TNAT

Please do not edit the article in question in the future unless you want to become involved in the discussion page. As the actual literal Director of NET or Network of European Technocrats, I think what you are doing here may be a commercial conflict of interests. skip sievert (talk) 02:39, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Skip, you're not allowed to bar editors from editing articles. Technocrate, what skip is doing isn't vandalism- he may be disruptive, but he's not a vandal. That being said, you should proceed with caution when you have a conflict of interest, as Wikipedia's guideline states. Also, I think the NET is given too much weight in the main technocracy article. Considering the American movement spanned from the 19th century onwards, and the European movement from 2006 onwards, I think it's clear the article is unbalanced. Also, by splitting the article, the "criticism" section is now longer than the history.-Wafulz (talk) 05:09, 14 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I think it’s quite clear from the edits made that they are largely POV. I think it is also quite clear from internal and external evidence to wikipedia that the edits are not simple honest errors. It appears that the edits are made with the deliberate intention of undermining the integrity of the technocracy article (and by extension wikipedia) with the intent of causing trouble. Therefore, that is a form of vandalism.

reference
Isenhand or Technocrate. Technocracy movement A reference that goes to a broken link. ^ Emanuelsson, Erik (3 November 2006). Det teknokratiska idealsamhället. Noden. Retrieved on 19 June 2007. I have noticed for some time that it leads to an unavailable page.

This is what the page leads to... "Not Found The requested URL /node/200 was not found on this server."

Is this link from a newspaper article or online entry somewhere ? As a reference it is no longer working. skip sievert (talk) 01:22, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Multiple accounts
If you are actually running multiple accounts as skip suggests, please stop and stick to one. It's confusing and unnecessary and could result in having your alternate accounts blocked.-Wafulz (talk) 19:37, 17 January 2008 (UTC)


 * No, I'm not.

You persist in editing the NET Network of European Technocrats
Without acting in good faith and assuming good intent. Why is that ? Is it because you are so intent on corroborating information you self published in a book that the income of which goes to NET ? That is a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest Wikipedia:Conflict of interest - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Why not open your mind to some different information ? You persistently quote two or three fiction books as evidence and your own book. That is writing about yourself. Not allowed here. skip sievert (talk) 02:41, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Block
I really didn't want to have to do this, but you've been blocked for 48 hours for edit-warring. When your block expires, please come back willing to discuss issues, and to assume good faith.-Wafulz (talk) 17:48, 1 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I do not have time for this. I just remove the vandalism and leave. Talk to isenhand.


 * Since this account is used solely for reverting Skip, it has been blocked for one month.-Wafulz (talk) 04:25, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Technocrate. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Technocrate~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 03:00, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 19:33, 22 April 2015 (UTC)