Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Wdl1961

Just a note, Wdl1961 hasn't edited in a couple weeks. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 02:44, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
 * If I'm not mistaken, he's blocked at the moment. Or maybe his block has expired but he hasn't yet come back. I've little doubt he will. —Scheinwerfermann T&middot;C 02:57, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, his block was only 48 hours long. Incidentally, he's made a few edits today. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 05:14, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah…did you see his bizarre edit to his RFC? —Scheinwerfermann T&middot;C 13:28, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Wiki should not try to think for someone else or tell how other people should think. Further mr. Scheinwerfermann behaves like  a bully, just look at his user page. He never answers any question but keeps talking about consensus. As long as he has a backup of a administrator he constantly threatens to block and he has been fairly successful at that. Also he does not want to delete tags that are placed without reason by one time users. These appear mostly to be from some schoolboys. According to Wiki rules inline refs are needed for possible controversial items. The bits and pieces of copies according to mr. Scheinwerfermann  are  unmodified and not corrupted by later editing. Dealing with his immature behavior is a waste of time and I do not need anything like this to proof myself. I have seen enough phonies to last the rest of my life. Wdl1961 (talk) 12:27, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Wow. If you still think that your edits are perfect even while admins like Julian are disagreeing, I see a problem there. Abce2 | Aww nuts!  Wribbit!(Sign here)  21:52, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Maybe some one can explain what a discussion is without ever getting an answer to a question. i must be still not knowing enough English and according to some people discussion means just stay at attention and listen and shut up. Where did i ever make the claim my edits are perfect. i just do not modify them after the fact. Wdl1961 (talk) 14:37, 27 August 2009 (UTC)