User talk:206.114.20.121

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Contents

[edit] Stop harassing me with false accusations, user 206.114.20.121

You entered to my User-Talk page the following:

(quote) "Please stop adding nonsense to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. "

Do you mean me, Lily, herewith, Tilman? (I think you are a Tilman-Sockpuppet)

Here is my message for you, Tilman:

1.: Stop insinuating, that I vandalize, which I do not and have never done. Come up with proofs, if you blame me for something, which I do not do.

2.: This is my usersite. If you find vandalism there, say it. I will then try to do something, if I share your opinion, so far I don't. There is no vandalism on my User Talk page, which would not be your business at all, nor do I vandalize, so stop harassing me.

3.: Sign your messages.

Lily Firered 20:09, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, Lily, but I am NOT Tilman. There is, I might add, NO conspiracy against Barbara Schwarz on Wikipedia; our only intention is to ascertain that the article provides as much objective information as possible. She does believe in the SEGNMPSS, and it was thought prudent to include a summary of her own articles on the subject; if she is not happy with us including other details (regard FOIA, etc.) that do not coincide with her own POV, that is her own problem. NPOV forbids her - and you - from making subjective, blatantly POV edits to the article; if we revert all your hard work, it is not because we're disguising the truth. We're not looking to reveal the truth either. We are not journalists or muckrakers here; we are EDITORS OF AN ENCYCLOPEDIA. 206.114.20.121 19:11, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Well - whatever you decide. I don't know, what muckrakers are, but your sentence "We're not looking to reveal the truth" seems an important one, 206 ... Think about it for a while. And you, "not looking to reveal the truth", should remember, that Barbara Schwarz is a human being, just like all of us are. And you, "not looking to reveal the truth", should remember, that an article like this next time could be written about you or your beloved one. I am still trusting in your good intentions and I wish you and all the wiki-contributors with good intentions the best. Lily Firered 20:09, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Me? No, they wouldn't write about me; I've done absolutely NOTHING worthy of any note. Barbara Schwarz, on the other hand, has filed more FOIA requests than anyone else in the history of the Freedom of Information Act; she's a former president of a branch of the Church of Scientology; and she's a controversial and somewhat well-known conspiracy theorist. When I do something that makes other people notice me and want to know more about me, THEN I will probably find people writing things about me on Wikipedia. Some of these things will be wrong. I will call the people who wrote such things wrong. I will not call them liars or call them libelous or claim that all of Wikipedia is corrupt; that would be overreacting. 206.114.20.121 21:58, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

206 I never said or called what you insinuate. Never. Either you mix me with Barbara or you have forgotten, who wrote what. I am not Barbara, even do not know her, I even am not sure, whether she is a high trained operative of the cult of scientology or really just a single fighter with her own imaginations and explanations of the world. All what I asked for was, to add to the article the truth, that she is a scientologist. But as the writer of the article, Tilman, explained, that is exactly what the church of scientology pr-agent does not want to hear! He writes only what scientology allows to write. Don't you really get that?

Where did I overreact? Please do not mix me with Barbara. We are two different beings, living on different continents even. Yet I can understand, that she is upset. I would be too, in her shoes. All she can do, is to look how other people write stuff about her and publish it and she says it is wrong and puts her in a false light. I understand, that she is upset, that she even got not the possibility to add her side to the article. It is not even allowed to say, that she is a scientologist. Yet she is! So add this by leaving no doubt about that fact - that she is a dedicated scientologist. That is all she is asking for, and me too. I think it is important.

About you mixing me with her: identity confusion is one of the main weapons the scientologists on the usenet (alt.religion.scientology) use to control criticism. So that could as well be forced even by Barbara herself. If she is working for OSA (and an OSA operative posts under that name on ars, but there are several "Barbara Schwarz" posting) she would profit from confusing identity with me. Please, if you find the time, and have an interest in that matter, consider reading some of Truth Seeker's articles, collected in the Hitchiker's Guide Through A.R.S. It is an eye-opener. [1] Lily Firered 09:12, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

This is a post by 206.114.20.121 on June 20, 2005, 13:02 at Talk:Scientology controversy#squabbling [[2]:

Several articles linked to this particular piece (the William Sargant thing, for example) have been edited and reedited repeatedly by people who cannot agree on a definition of NPOV. As this epidemic appears to have infected this page as well, I feel it necessary to ask here what can be done - mere squabbling on individual pages is going to solve nothing. -- User:206.114.20.121
Ad hominem. What is your POV dispute? Please provide a reference of the chronic "epidemic" you are talking about. If necessity so compells you to set records straight, please create a Wikipedia account and learn the rules. And don't forget to sign your posts.--AI 2 July 2005 00:31 (UTC)
Are you trying to incite hate? You have influenced User:Antaeus Feldspar and User:BTfromLA in Talk:Scientology controversy, their arguments are based upon your lies.--AI 3 July 2005 05:52 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Hall Monitor 21:58, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

okay, I get it, I get it - from now on I attempt to make myself useful

[edit] RPF

Could you provide some sort of evidence that the link you added to the Rehabilitation Project Force page actually shows such a facility? A2Kafir 21:59, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

in one of the documentaries archived at Mark Bunker's website [3], there is a german documentary "the dark side of Scn" or "die dunkel Seite von Scn" where that very complex is flown over in a helicopter and identified by an ex-Scientologist as an RPF site. the staff at Gold Base called the authorities out when the chopper flew over that location. sorry I haven't anything harder to go on... you can delete it if you like.

[edit] Avoiding truth

"We're not looking to reveal the truth either." - 206.114.20.121

I'm sorry to hear that is your approach. --AI 02:03, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

The operative term is not 'truth', but 'reveal'. We are not journalists here (recall WP: No original research); we are editors of an encyclopedia. Perhaps I should have phrased it thus: "We're not looking to uncover some hidden truth. Our only interest is in presenting the facts from a neutral point of view." I could ask you to participate in Wikipedia in similar fashion, but since you have expressed on multiple occasions a desire to "destroy Wikipedia" through legal or other means, I see no point in it. 206.114.20.121 18:13, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Intel

Thanks for the citations. Do you know how that case was resolved? -- Gnetwerker 22:52, 24 March 2006 (UTC) = I posted what I know. Sorry. There's a few online references to him receiving 30 or 33 months in prison, something like that, but that's all. After 1996 or '97 "Bill" Gaede vanishes off the map; he either went on the QT or left the country. 206.114.20.121 22:57, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks...

... for noting in your edit of J. R. R. Tolkien that it was to revert vandalism. I've blocked the problem user for 1 month to the day. -- Zanimum 18:01, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../2/0/6/User_talk%7E206.114.20.121.html"