User talk:Wjhonson/Archive1

Baha'i Faith
Baha'is for the most part greatly resent any attempt to cast their founders in any light other than the one "approved by the House of Justice". From my research, the history of the movement, going even as far back as the Shaytis gets re-writen with every new generation. Deliberate misstaments are passed onto the mostly US converts who cannot read the original languages and do not have the perspicacity to delve into the controversies that have raged in this community since it's founding. I do not ever anticipate getting a Baha'i Barnstar or whatever their stupid *medal* is called, even though I have done more research than probably 98% of them. In fact, I think I'll look into creating my own medal. Maybe I'll call it a "Baha'i TRUTH medal". Right now I'm just totally pissed at their attitude of wanting to believe whatever Shoghi Effendi says without looking at the sources of their own history to see if it's accurate or not. Maybe I'll write more on this when I cool down a bit.Wjhonson 17:02, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Lots of time
If you are reading my archive, you have a lot of time on your hands, or perhaps you're just on a vendetta to see what kind of dirt you can dig up about me. Maybe you should spend more time reading your religious books which tell you how to be meek and peaceful and kind and spend less time trying to figure out how to be vendictive and nasty and aggressive. Maybe? Wjhonson 23:20, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Editing other editors' posts on your Own talk page
You have now committed an additional type of vandalism; Do not edit OTHER editors' signed comments. Look, I want to help you learn the ropes, but you seem to be taking all of this personally. It isn't. I will be more than happy to help you learn the policies, and deal with conflict, per WP policy, guideline, and methods. Perhaps if you step back a bit, take some calming breaths, it will not seem so much an "us vs. them" situation to you. KillerChihuahua?!? 17:10, 9 February 2006 (UTC)


 * On the vandalism page it states quite clearly that even arbitrators remove comments from other editors from their own user talk pages. Can you address that statement? Wjhonson 17:13, 9 February 2006 (UTC)


 * And from the official wiki page on Vandalism this quote "Talk page vandalism - Deleting the comments of other users from article Talk pages, or deleting entire sections thereof, is generally considered vandalism. ... The above does NOT apply to the user's own Talk page, where users generally are permitted to remove outside comments at their discretion. " (emphasis added) Wjhonson 17:30, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Blanking your talk page
Dude. It's bad form to blank your talk page, especially if you've been warned about vandalism. You've been on Wikipedia long enough for others to expect you to know this. MARussellPESE 05:00, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

it is more than bad form, it is Vandalism. See Wikipedia:Vandalism#Types of vandalism. Do not remove warnings from your talk page. KillerChihuahua?!? 10:57, 9 February 2006 (UTC)


 * And I respectfully disagree. A user can modify their own talk pages, including blanking them whenever and however they wise.  I will post a link that says just that shortly. Wjhonson 19:17, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Please put comments on user talk pages rather than user pages. AndrewRT 16:59, 8 February 2006 (UTC)


 * That was an honest mistake since I have only posted messages to other users perhaps once or twice in two years. Wjhonson 03:27, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

I don't appreciate abusive comments directed at me, or others, whether they're on user pages, talk pages or edit summaries; especially when you are not following Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Please be civil. MARussellPESE 21:02, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
 * And I don't appreciate having my useful edits reverted or having their intent flipped upside-down with no comment or discussion. Wjhonson 03:28, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

It is vandalism, when you touch my user page. If you want to leave a comment, leave it on my talk page. -- Jeff3000 21:22, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
 * That was an honest mistake since I have only posted messages to other users perhaps once or twice in two years.Wjhonson 03:28, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Archiving
Wjhonson, even if Wikipedia policy isn't clear or contradictory on this point, removing criticism from one's Talk page is considered bad form. Please don't try to make a point, the Talk page exists as a forum through which other users can contact you.

I have created an archive page on your Talk page. Please move dated discussion to that page, and keep the link to the archive prominently displayed. -- Ec5618 18:24, 9 February 2006 (UTC)


 * By selectively moving only critical comments to your archive, you are creating the impression that your behaviour is not criticised.
 * You have claimed that policy allows you to behave in this way. Even if it does, you shouldn't behave in this way. Please stop. I can direct you to other pages of policy, if I must:
 * Vandalism
 * Civility
 * Please observe both. Thank you. -- Ec5618 18:42, 9 February 2006 (UTC)


 * My behavior so far has only been criticized by right-wing Baha'is who want to see their god-man as inviolate and untouchable by historical review. That is how all this started, because I'm posting npov edits to the Baha'i pages to correct their pov ones. Wjhonson 03:30, 11 February 2006 (UTC)