Difference between revisions of "User talk:Anti post-truth"
(→Welcome to Wikispooks!: Vandalism) |
m |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
==Vandalism== | ==Vandalism== | ||
This person has made a series of edits to articles that can only be described as vandalism. Either that behaviour stops, or the person should be banned from Wikispooks.--[[User:Patrick Haseldine|Patrick Haseldine]] ([[User talk:Patrick Haseldine|talk]]) 00:33, 6 February 2017 (GMT) | This person has made a series of edits to articles that can only be described as vandalism. Either that behaviour stops, or the person should be banned from Wikispooks.--[[User:Patrick Haseldine|Patrick Haseldine]] ([[User talk:Patrick Haseldine|talk]]) 00:33, 6 February 2017 (GMT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | This is completely untrue. The complainant has put on some articles that contain statements he knows (and I know) are completely untrue, and defame an individual or organisation. I have not altered the article. All I have added is that the article is a post-truth, and explained what this means. If he removes things that he knows to be untrue (or are just supposition), my 'addition' would then be unnecessary. The only 'change' I made to an article he wrote was when he put a link to a 17 year old girls FaceBook page. I removed that link. If he calls this 'vandalism' I suggest he relooks at the definition of the word. | ||
Revision as of 01:55, 6 February 2017
Welcome to Wikispooks!
We're glad you came. There's lots to do.
The Community portal is probably the best place to start for new users. To add a Wikispooks search facility to your browser, go here. If you've got a topic you're itching to write about, just dive in. If you're not sure where to start, you can introduce yourself by editing either this page or your user page. Peter P (talk) 20:15, 5 February 2017 (GMT)
Vandalism
This person has made a series of edits to articles that can only be described as vandalism. Either that behaviour stops, or the person should be banned from Wikispooks.--Patrick Haseldine (talk) 00:33, 6 February 2017 (GMT)
This is completely untrue. The complainant has put on some articles that contain statements he knows (and I know) are completely untrue, and defame an individual or organisation. I have not altered the article. All I have added is that the article is a post-truth, and explained what this means. If he removes things that he knows to be untrue (or are just supposition), my 'addition' would then be unnecessary. The only 'change' I made to an article he wrote was when he put a link to a 17 year old girls FaceBook page. I removed that link. If he calls this 'vandalism' I suggest he relooks at the definition of the word.
