Talk:Greg Felton/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Recreated Mr. Felton's Page

I have recreated Greg Feltons page. The reason I am recreating it is because he is a worthy character, accomplished author and columnist who is a hot topic amongst the Judaic and Arab communities in Canada. A quick search on Google confirms that he is noted and people are talking about him. I could list many people/organizations who have their own pages and are not nearly as notable as Mr. Felton. Everything I said on this page is documented and I have provided references as to his writings for the National Vanguard (Canada.com). Last time I created his page he came on personally name calling, and saying that accusing someone of being Jewish is a serious insult; backtracking out of it and saying he was only mocking me. Before anyone deletes this page there needs to be a vote on notability and we must make sure that Mr. Felton does not interfere as he did last time with the morality and neutrality of wikipedian community.

--Eternalsleeper 08:53, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Wrongful edits

CJCurrie has revised the page to the exact way Greg Felton himself had it. Everything is documented and I am going to contact some administrators if these POV's continue. He is listed on JDL, and Canada.com has said he wrote for the National Vanguard. Asking Felton himself is against original research and a breach of the wikipedia rules.

--Eternalsleeper 03:47, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

(i) The JDL is an extremist organization, (ii) Ezra Levant is a non-neutral source, (iii) I removed the National Vanguard information *pending clarification*, to prevent a WP:BIO violation. I've never been in contact with Greg Felton, nor do I intend to contact him at any time in the future (and I don't in any way endorse his writings ... from what I've seen, he looks like a thoroughly disreputable figure). CJCurrie 04:12, 14 October 2007 (UTC)


User:CJCurrie, i'm not quite aware of all the issues, but i can say that, while there's always room for improvement, the previous version, seemed reasonable. wikipedia is not a censorship, and if you have notes about JDL being an extreme advocacy group, that could be added into the article, and if you have notes that Greg Felton stated something regarding National Vanguard, that also can be added into the article.
considering this, i'm reverting per WP:NOT censorship.
p.s. describing a person who titles his book ...How Israel's filth polluted America as "Some have described Felton as a figure of the far-right." without adding a citation[1] seems a tad weaselly. JaakobouChalk Talk 04:27, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
Actually, clicking on the link will indicate that his book isn't called "How Israel's filth polluted America". CJCurrie 22:05, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

I plan to do more research on Felton soon; hopefully, we can prevent this from degenerating into a full-blown edit war. CJCurrie 05:06, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

For the edification of Oxymoron and CJCurrie, Eternalsleeper has a desperate need to libel me and attack my writing. He has previously tried to put up a defamatory page about me and it was pulled at my request. I am surprised to find he did it again. If people want to write about me I ask three things:

(1) Write about what I WRITE, not what you want to make of it. (2) Malcilious, pro-Israeli pseudo-editors like eternalsleeper be banned from mangling the page. (3) Accuracy of negative comments be proven, not simply parroted just because someone said them. For example, Ezra Levant libeled me, and the JDL is a known terrorist organization (Google "Irv Rubin"). It is grossly unfair to repeat a libel.

Finally, for CJCurrie: Thank you for coming to my defence, if somewhat reluctantly. If you want clarification on anything I have written, please e-mail me. I will be happy to answer you as soon as possible. My writing may be too sharp for some, but it is always well researched and logically argued. I hope that, in your investigations, you will come to find that I am not disreputable.

Voxveritatis 02:25, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Mr. Felton, there is a proof you have written for or on behalf of the National Vanguard, and that Jewish groups have accused of being anti-Semitism. I would highly suggest you do not make malicious edits to your own page as you will be reported and most likely removed if you continue to violate the rules and make POV edits. Thank you.
--Eternalsleeper 04:54, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

[Comment deleted by Voxveritatis per request below] If any one should be reported fort malicious editing it is you, who has nothing better to do than cherry pick rumours about me and attack my charater. CEASE AND DESIST!! Better yet, go back to sleep. Voxveritatis 07:03, 18 October 2007 (UTC)ǚ

Felton continually censoring his page and violting rules

User:Voxveritatis who appears to be Greg Felton is censoring information which he does not wish, removing all the critism that he receives and cursing and calling names. This member should be permanently blocked if he continues to defy the rules of Wikipedia. I have reported him on several boards.

--Eternalsleeper 04:51, 19 October 2007 (UTC)


Wah! Wah!

You have a long and sordid history of violating wikipedia rules so spare me your sanctimonious whining. [Comments deleted by Voxveritatis per request below] Voxveritatis 04:57, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Voxveritatis, I kindly ask you to review Wikipedia:Civility, Wikipedia:Etiquette and Wikipedia:No personal attacks. You are perfectly free to criticize the comments or edits of other editors, but your insults are inappropriate, and may lead to you being blocked from Wikipedia if you continue. As for your comment "Get off my site", this is not your site. Skeezix1000 11:29, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
I would concur with Skeezix1000. It is clear that inappropriate, inaccurate information is being added to this article and I appreciate your frustration, but rest assured that other editors will deal with the situation. We will feel much more motivated (!) if your behaviour is above reproach. As a result, I would suggest striking out parts of the above comment per [2]. --Slp1 11:39, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough. It is reassuring to see that this time I am not fighting by myself. Can eternalsleeper be banned so that this problem does not recur?

Thanks, Voxveritatis 14:10, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I hope you don't mind that I added placeholders to your deleted comments (as recommended by [3]), since otherwise this conversation will be hard to follow. There are a few other bits that might bear similar treatment in my opinion, though. Yes, there are eventual consequences for editors who add inappropriately or incorrect negative information to articles, especially of living people. All editors here should read, or reread, WP:BLP, and note that editors are obliged to remove unsourced or poorly sourced material from this article. That policy also recommends that apart from removing unsourced or poorly sourced material, the subject of an article should not edit their own article (see WP:AUTO). To that end, and especially given the dispute, it would probably also be best if Voxveritatis followed these guidelines and did not edit the article directly, except under the circumstances noted above. Making suggestions on the talkpage is fine, though. Ideally, VV might want to revert his recent edits to the article in order to follow this guideline.Slp1 14:57, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Felton's work appeared on the National Vangaurd, Canada.com (owned by the biggest newspaper company in Canada) made it public. I will re-add it shortly as it cannot be disputed and must be mentioned. As you can see by the name calling, and if you review his comments he wrote to me deeper, you will see that he considers calling someone Jewish is insulting.

--Eternalsleeper 18:32, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
The article in question was actually published by the National Post, in an opinion column by Ezra Levant. Other editors, here and in edit summaries on the page itself have questioned Levant's neutrality given his political stance etc. I agree with them. It does not appear that you have consensus for this edit, given that your additions have been reverted by three separate editors (not including the subject of the article).Slp1 19:21, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
Please see this essay about fact laundering, which is to all intents and purposes what Eternalsleeper's National Post reference is attempting to do. This post explains the principal in more detail [4] Slp1 18:56, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh, really, eternalsleeper? Earlier you ADMITTED that I had a case that I did not permit National Vanguard to reprint a column of mine. You have also been warned to cease your malicious editing of my page. Other editors, like Slip1 and CJCurrie, have had the integrity to recognize that Ezra Levant is not a credible source. If you persist in your mischief I have been assured that you will be blocked. You clearly have no interest in me except as person to vilify. You are a repeat offender of Wikipedia rules, and you will be dealt with. Voxveritatis 20:37, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

lol, violator of the rules Voxveritatis. What rules did I violate? Did you see how many edits I have made an pages I created, meanwhile yourself who has only edited what appears to be his own paged and name calling everyone who you feel is "libeling" you? You should not even be on wikipedia after what you wrote to me and the other fellow, amongst that you have at least 3 different accounts and your latest comment on my talk page shows that if you look up the IP address location.

I find it absolutely comical you would talk to me about the wikipedia rules when you have violated them each time with your post and have been warned. Greg Felton's writings have appeared on the National Vanguard-- a notorious white supremacy hate site. Edward Munch's work does not appear on that site, they only post hate. You told me that calling someone Jewish is degrading them, now only a complete ignorant fool would not contest that as an example of someone who holds some deep feelings for Jewish people. Did I call you a neo-Nazi, NO, I didn't. I said your work appeared on National Vanguard if this is indeed Felton, and there is a credible link from Canada.com which asserts what many of us know but cannot locate the exact article at this point but I will continue to look for "credible" evidence which will not be able to be contested on wikipedia. Thanks.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Eternalsleeper (talk • contribs) 00:52, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

External links

Should there really be so many links to Felton's writing? It seems unnecessary to have anything other than his personal website. Are there any specific reasons for including the other links? --clpo13(talk) 06:29, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

We should add the link by Ezra Levant which was carried by Canada.com that says Felton wrote for the National Van Guard. I know he did, if you do a google search on him you will find people complaining about his writings because he is anti-Semitic. Canada.com does not just name an author and claim they are writing for the most notoriest and well known hate site on the Internet without just cause. I will wait to see if anyone else cares about Felton before editing this page, it seems he's not important at this point but I will keep my eye on this extremely bias page as it stands and hope some people don't want to censor valid information about the National Vanguard.
Just that his work appeared on the Van Guard without or with his consent gives you an idea of his writings since it's a neo-Nazi hate site.
--Eternalsleeper 00:46, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
The Ezra Levant thing is clearly an opinion piece rather than a National Post news article and therefore not that reputable for a encyclopedic citation and certainly does not verify that Felton wrote for the Vanguard. All it does it show that Levant said that a piece Felton wrote was published there but Felton denies this and even accuses Levant of libel. DoubleBlue (Talk) 23:31, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Defamation by Association

Look, eternalsleeper, I will say this once more: Just because Ezra Levant commits a libel against me does not make that comment legitimate because the Asper chain published it. If that were the case I could repeat any rumour about you no matter how far-fetched nust because I saw it on some website. I have standards; I wouldn't do that. I have asked Slp1 why you have not been banned before now, since you contribute little of use to Wikipedia. Most of your talk page is devoted to reprimands from editors fed up with your misconduct and disresepct. Voxveritatis 18:33, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, sure. 1,000 edits that I've done on many different topics from over 2-years ago, mostly all which do not pertain do as you say, Zionism, etc. If Ezra Levant and Asper media are conspiring against you, perhaps you should file a lawsuit against them so the truth can be known. The only reason I have heard of Greg Felton is because I received an e-mail from a Palestinian web site in Ottawa when he was to speak at the Nepean Public Library next to my house glorifying him for speaking out against "Nazi Israel." If it's not true I do not wish to post it anyhow, I just find it hard to believe Canada.com would publish something so potentially, as you say, "libelous," without credibility. Anyhow, for Greg Felton's work to even appear on the National Van Guard web site it has to be appeal to neo-Nazi's and that alone in my opinion suggests the nature of this persons work.
--Eternalsleeper 06:14, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
I appreciate your reconsideration about your edit intentions, Eternalsleeper. Hopefully this dispute can be seen as over. It will probably help if you both stop posting back and forth from now on.--Slp1 12:04, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

voxveritatis, Greg Felton, etc, I just wanted to reiterate that you appear to be violating the rules by using multiple accounts, as you can see here [5] at the bottom where you are pretending to be troubled that doubleblue has removed the personal advertisement that the person claiming to be greg Felton posted. You can also look at my talk page, at the bottom under Greg Felton and find a similar i.p with the words "HA" on it, all traceable to shaw cable in British Columbia where Greg Felton is said to have residence. Not sure who you think you are fooling here but it's certainly not me. Please do not use multiple accounts.

--Eternalsleeper 06:20, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
I think you are mistaken about WP's rules, Eternalsleeper. While using IPs and different accounts is confusing and it would be better if Voxveritatis remembered to sign in, multiple accounts are not forbidden on WP and can in fact serve legitimate purposes. See WP:SOCK. Voxveritatis has not used the IPs or the account for any "forbidden" purposes (such as to avoid the 3 revert rule) and in fact from his comments/edit summaries it is always very clear that it is the same editor.Slp1 11:56, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
Oh really? Allowed to use multiple accounts- thats a new one. Seeing one time I accidentally forgot to sign in and an administrator told me that I was possibly using a sock proxy or whatever that is suppose to mean? He is using his anonymous IP to mock me and if you looked at all the related users on this page you would see he pretended to be a 3rd party troubled by the fact someone removed his personal advertisement which he tried to put up.
--Eternalsleeper 17:57, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
As you can see, yes, multiple accounts are allowed, as long as you don't break the rules set out there. I don't believe your accusations of malfeasance have any substance, since the IPs Voxveritatis used both stated upfront that they were Greg Felton: see the edit summary here [6], and the text here [7]. Nor did he attempt to game the system. Please remember the mantra Assume good faith, and let it drop.--Slp1 20:39, 22 October 2007 (UTC)


haha, assume good faith, right. You haven't looked so carefully at all the anonymous edits he made including one on my page. My accusations of "malfeasance" have much "substance." You haven't even complained about Felton, in fact it seems you are sympathizing with him and justify his disobedience by calling him frustrated. I assume there are quite a few people on wikipedia who are frustrated with their pages, but felton's not immune from criticism or censorship. I've requested further information from credible people to see if they can back up these claims about the van guard and I will see what happens slp1.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Eternalsleeper (talk • contribs) 02:37, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Actually I have looked at the "Hah" on your page and all the other anonymous edits. And I have remonstrated with Voxveritatis for his behaviour. But it seems he actually listened, while you continue on and on, despite the fact that you on multiple occasions added demonstrably false information to the article by changing the title of his book. Vandalism, plain and simple. No contrition? No, not so much. Instead, just more baseless accusations and threats. I don't blame Felton for getting frustrated with your vendetta, I am getting pretty frustrated myself. Slp1 03:18, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Yes well that's tough, I've been frustrated many times on wikipedia. if i changed the title of his book it was a mistake or a typo. The only reason he listened is because you sided with him; I don't know ezra levant, all I know is that appeared in Asper media (canada.com) and i feel it's worthy of being noted and let the readers distinguish for themselves if it's notable or not. If you did a google search you would see there are many people who feel he is a far right figure with extremely controversial writings. Have a good day ;)
--Eternalsleeper 05:25, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

"mistake or typo?!!" Who are you trying to kid?! The "f" and "l" on a keyboard are nowhere near each other and you omitted a whole word--repeatedly. How is it you could make the same "typo" no fewer than three times? Slp1 has caught you dead to rights trying to defame me. Do us all a favour and quit while you're behind. Voxveritatis 04:56, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I said a mistake or a typo, it was obviously a mistake. With the book name being how it is, there is no need to twist the wording for it to be controversial.
--Eternalsleeper 05:17, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
So you would like other editors to assume good faith about you, something you refused to do for others (see above)? However, in this case, your explanation rings hollow since you continued to add the false book name [8] [9] [10] after the 'mistake/typo' had been pointed out multiple times [11][12][13].
This is not a question of who is ahead or who is behind. But is is time to stop. This is going nowhere, guys. --Slp1 11:47, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. Well said, Slp1. To get back to my earlier question, though, why hasn't Wikipedia taken action against eternalsleeper before now, given his track rcord of deliberate misconduct? Voxveritatis 14:09, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps because you are both at fault: Eternalsleeper for continually inserting material that has been determined to be unnecessary and you for editing a page specifically about you. Remember the bit about conflict of interest? What this page needs is more uninvolved editors, not petty arguing. --clpo13(talk) 22:45, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Not so!! I would not have had to intercede in my own page had not eternalsleeper been bent on defaming me. Surely you can understand that. I suggest you read Slp1's comments, especially this one: "I don't blame Felton for getting frustrated with your vendetta, I am getting pretty frustrated myself." At any rate, it looks like the problem has pasased, since good editors will not allow the "Greg Felton" page to be vandalized. Voxveritatis 01:15, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

I didn't defame you, I posted an article from Canada.com that claims you wrote for the National Van Guard. The controversy on your end seems to be they put their work on your site without your permission; as you mentioned on your previous page. I didn't make up any stories. As for the other thing you are listed on JDL's site under Jew Haters. I'm not saying they are not a radical organization but that's where your listed. Talk to them about it. All I did was post a link and I didn't know it wasn't credible enough for Wikipedia but like I said, I wouldn't want to post anything that's not true about you or anyone/thing else. There is Union on wikipedia Greg, and everyone is entitled to their own opinion on articles which is required to be backed up by references.
--Eternalsleeper 01:34, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.