Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Wrongdoing on the Nostradamus Wikipedia page.

{{subst:Request for mediation


 * parties =
 * 1) {{user|Mark Smith (Smithsurf talk)
 * 2) {{user|Peter Lemesurier (PL talk)


 * articles =
 * 1) Nostradamus
 * 2) talk: Nostradamus


 * links =
 * Markuze72 is making inaccurate alterations to the article and defaming allegations against Peter Lemsurier on the 'talk' section.


 * issues =

Wrongdoing and request for resolution.

}} I am concerned about someone who is ambushing the article on your 'Nostradamus' subject page.

Markuze72 has been making: inaccurate alterations to the above; false claims with respect to research and defaming statements against Peter Lemesurier (PL talk), who is a recognized expert in this area.

These include misrepresenting information, such as describing Nostradamus as the ‘personal doctor’ of King Charles IX, before he was officially a physician. (Thus by definition, he was therefore in-fact an ‘apothecary’ during that period!). Another example of such, relates to the fact that Nostradamus is on record (in the letter to his son Caesar) in stating that he did not consider himself a prophet. His ‘Prophecies’ were based on previous predictions and historical events. The process of projecting these into the future does not make them any less prophetic, (even though they were not actually first written or foreseen by him). Hence why, they could still be justifiable titled as such.

Due to this, I request that you please block the comments that Markuze72 makes to this particular page. Failure to do so could result in the credibility of the article being permanently compromised. Smithsurf (talk) 00:47, 21 September 2014 (UTC)