Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Simple view of ethics and morals

Banned Use EntmootsOfTrolls is back, and wrote the following on the Article page.


 * You edited the article yourself, in the damaged form, then propose to delete it? This is a hidden agenda.  The topic is not the same, what ordinary people mean when they say "ethics and morals" is not what the academic philosopher means, whether the academic likes it or not.  As to the article on ethics there has been a lot of damage to it from your POV and similar POV that need to be fixed up.  There's a systemic bias problem that too many male Western philosophers and not enough female, Asian, or postmodernists are here to defend their views from constant attacks from those who feel threatened by them.


 * This article is by no means a duplicate and now has been restored to a version that is nicely balanced.


 * Finally, avoid ad hominem delete arguments or you will soon be considered one of the Young Jacobins

Hararssment by a banned user
Although EntmootsOfTrolls has been hard banned, he repeatedly resurfaces on Wikipedia in various guises, usually with anonymous IPs beginning with 142.xxx. (And he repeatedly is blocked, over and over.) Well, he has just made a new attack on on my User discussion page, for the "crime" of following standard Wikipedia policy for the deletion of a duplicate article.

(1) EntmootsOfTrolls (EoT) originally broke Wikipedia policy by creating his own article on Ethics, parallel to our real article. His parallel article existed solely to promote his own point of view. All I did was follow standard polict for redirection or deletion, by asking others for their input. Yet see EoT's diatribe against me on my home page!

(2) He is publicly accusing me of "censorship" on the Ethics article. (This is despite the fact that the edits I made are part of the consensus version that has been accepted by the vast majority of all editors of this article.)

(3) He explicitly violated Wikipedia policy by anonymously deleting the link which had the article say "This article is being considered for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy. Please see this article's entry on the Votes for Deletion page for voting and discussion on the matter." When an article is up for discussion on such issues, a single user may not unilaterally just delete this. So do you have any suggestions? I'd hate for this banned user to start an edit war. Its only a matter of time before he goes after other of his self-perceived adversaries. RK 20:02, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)