Changes

The case against Gwen Gale (view source)

Revision as of 01:46, 16 February 2012

1,457 bytes added , 01:46, 16 February 2012

→‎Gwen Gale makes a fool of yourself and of Wikipedia

Line 248: Line 248:

Professor Timothy Messer-Kruse who is a world famous expert on the subject was ordered to review [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:CIVIL "Wikipedia's civility policy"] although he was civil, and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet "Wikipedia's policy on sockpuppets"] simply because he forgot to log in.

+

Here's a post at Gwen's talk page concerning her involvement in the matter:

+

[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Gwen_Gale&oldid=477103224 "Hello. I just want to point out that I recently read an article in the chronicle here: http://chronicle.com/article/The-Undue-Weight-of-Truth-on/130704/ and it describes what amounts to an edit war that you were engaged in. I looked at the page and discussion in question, and it seems to me that you are boorish and a bully. I would like to suggest that you tone down your air of self-righteous authority, in order to encourage a more civil atmosphere on Wikipedia. It's especially ironic that when presented with what seems to be a very civil point by (presumably) the author of the blog, you ignored the substance of his argument and instead groundlessly accused him of being uncivil himself. If you're going to wear that hat of uncontested arbitrator of *TRUTH*, it would be helpful if you at least justified your claims in detail to those who go to the trouble of trying to actually discuss the truth in a balanced fashion using reliable sources. As it stands, you arbitrarily call seemingly reliable sources "unreliable", and other sources that support your preferred narrative "reliable," and this makes you an awful bully. Please consider changing your behavior and attitudes. Best regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashwinr (talk • contribs) 17:29, 15 February 2012 (UTC)"]

==Bloggers about Gwen Gale==

Kolobok

236

edits