User talk:Laurence67

Three Revert Rule

Laurence, you've violated the 3 Revert Rule at Bogdanov Affair. You were active on the talk page when I warned contributors about the rule, and I'd be quite justified in blocking you right now. But if you stop reverting immediately, I'll assume it was a mistake. Please read the rule again. Bishonen | talk 15:37, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration has been requested in a matter you are involved in. Please see WP:RFAR for more. Snowspinner 19:11, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Section Editing

I realize that editing on subjects that one is passionate about (for whatever reason) leads to impulsive reverts. But there are some good Wikipedia policies and ideas that have nothing to do with content, so please consider taking the time to preserve changes that are good. For instance, think about the benefits of Wikipedia:Section#Editing_of_individual_sections. I'm referring to the Bogdanov Affair but this applies to any article.

Also, participating with some amount of diplomacy in the discussion instead of just one-liners in the edit history will lead to a better long-term result. "Don't revert faster than you can discuss." The same principle of numbers that makes the Usenet criticisms of Bogdanov so prevalent predict the tide of what's going to happen on Wikipedia. If you frustrate the technical majority too much, they will just lock the page and write whatever they like. I think this yields better results than not doing it (see the archived discussions on Talk:Time Cube) but certainly nowhere as good as if the participants were realistic about what they were going to be able to get into the article in the long run. Metaeducation 15:46, 30 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration accepted

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Regarding The Bogdanov Affair has been accepted. Please place evidence at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Regarding The Bogdanov Affair/Evidence Fred Bauder 15:30, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

I have blocked you for 24 for excessive use of reverts and insufficient discussion and negociations. I hope that you will come back with a more peaceful and collaborative spirit.

I also hope, though that's not of your responsability, that you see that the "opposite side" (since apparently noone cares to think it otherwise) will have behaved properly in your temporary absence; note that I intend to to treat them no differently that you, as I have advertised several times before. Rama 13:18, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

L'éternel retour

Bonjour Laurence,

Je suis de loin cette affaire et je m'étonne de te voir de nouveau poster après ton départ en grande pompe. Tu avais à mon sens pris la bonne décision.

Cordialement, Julien

J'arrête d'éditer l'article (à moins qu'ils remplacent Rama par un administrateur neutre et impartial, on peut rêver) parce que j'en ai marre que tout ce que j'écris soit reverté, c'est une perte de temps. Mais je lui ai bien précisé, tout de suite après qu'il m'ait bloquée (page):

I won't edit this article any more, I'm fed up with loosing such a time to fight against malicious people who are protected by a partial administrator. I know that it is exactly what you wished to get by being so strong with us and so lax with YBM, rjb, etc., but in such conditions there is no point to continue. But it's not over, you can be sure of that.

Ce serait trop facile qu'il ne reste plus que les ennemis des Bogdanov pour argumenter contre eux...

Laurence67 18:15, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ban on editors involved in Bogdanov Affair

All user accounts used by participants in the external controversy (involving the Bogdanov Affari) are banned from Wikipedia pending resolution of this matter. The criteria for determining external involvement shall be a review of their edit history, it being presumed that if the vast majority of their edits were to the Bogdanov Affair and related pages such as this arbitration that they are not Wikipedia editors but persons involved in the external dispute. This group includes: YBM (talk · contribs), XAL (talk · contribs), ProfesseurYIN (talk · contribs), Igor B. (talk · contribs), CatherineV (talk · contribs), 82.123.187.53 (talk · contribs). Laurence67 (talk · contribs), EE Guy (talk · contribs), 82.123.46.149 (talk · contribs), 82.123.57.232 (talk · contribs), Luis A. (talk · contribs) and all others who meet the criteria. Rbj (talk · contribs), a regular Wikipedia editor, and Ze miguel (talk · contribs), a new editor who has edited other areas, are banned from editing Bogdanov Affair, pending resolution of this matter.

A less restrictive injunction Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Regarding_The_Bogdanov_Affair/Proposed_decision#Ban_on_editing_Bogdanov_Affair is under consideration and may replace the total bans. Fred Bauder 19:07, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Final decision

The arbitraton committee has reached a final decision in the Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Regarding The Bogdanov Affair case. →Raul654 03:35, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]