Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 12:54, 21 January 2013

This is Favonian's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58Auto-archiving period: 31 days

Blocking of Wstreiff

Hello,

I am concerned about the reason why you blocked User: Wstreiff indefinitely from Misplaced Pages. The account is obviously not a sockpuppet of Jackiekong, since he himself introduced himself as Kong's personal secretary; thus the similarities between their edits and IP addresses. If you note the legal threat, it was more of a good faith request than a threat. The first paragraph certainly made it clear that they simply wished intervention on part of Misplaced Pages. IMO the other threat is more due to ignorance of Misplaced Pages policies than anything else; and so cannot be held against him. Even the last So how and why is he blocked indefinitely blocked from Misplaced Pages? And since I did not understand how it was a BLP violation, it would be good if you clarified that too.

If you look at it from retrospect, it looks like this- Mr Kong comes to make an article about himself - He finds it vandalised - He reverts and asks for help - He is blocked.

TheOriginalSoni (talk) 19:43, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

The sockpuppetry allegation was definitely a mistake (I got three sets of edits to the article messed up), but the rationale for blocking was legal threats, and it's difficult not to interpret this edit as such. Wstreiff will have to make a clear retraction to get reinstated. The impersonating vandal has been indeffed and the IP sent off for a week. Favonian (talk) 20:10, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Aren't you obliged to explain the WP position on legal threats before or during your blocking? There must be clear cut words explaining when would the block be reverted, and which policies apply, and how WP can protect the page (Defending the quality of which was the only and the original intention {And presumably used as a last resort} of the threat) TheOriginalSoni (talk) 20:20, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Warnings are not an entitlement, and legal threats are as a rule taken very seriously. I am, as implied above, willing to unblock if the editor retracts the statement, and Floquenbeam has offered them further guidance on the talk page. Favonian (talk) 20:25, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

I believe AGF supercedes NLT, isn't it? (Correct me if I am wrong here). There was very obvious implications of good faith, which you messed u with a simple overlooking . Warnings before blocking may not be necessary, but surely you cant justify giving no warnings to someone who knows absolutely no WP Policies! .

As for the implied unblock, I dont think so that its that obvious to the user being blocked that he/she can be unblocked through this method. A comment explaining the situation would have made more sense.

I am happy that Floquenbeam did post those guidance on the page. Without him, the user would have been absolutely helpless on what to do. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 20:35, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

I did not use the word "vandal" in my help desk comment. To my knowledge, we don't have "ranking" between AGF and NLT, so I await the editor's unblock request. Favonian (talk) 20:40, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

"Obviously just a regular vandal.".

AGF is a major part of the fourth pillar. NLT is not a major part of any pillar (AFAIK. please correct if wrong). AGF is written in clear cut words "to consider ignorance of policies before acting againt the user" (and never asks to not assume good faith, AFAIK). NLT hints at using other methods before actually blocking. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 20:49, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Ah, meaning this one? I thought it obvious that I was referring to the "Jackiekong" account. As for the rest, I have nothing more to contribute to the discussion at present. Favonian (talk) 20:55, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

It wasnt. I suggest you rephrase.

Please also explain how this was a BLP violation. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 20:57, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Wikilinking years

Hey Favonian. I was curious: is there a policy on "wikilinking" years? I have noticed that Portuguese Wikipedians tend to overdue this linking, and some users on English Misplaced Pages revert excessive wikilinking of this type. If you could please direct me to an appropriate guideline I would really appreciate it. I recently saw a newbie user from Portuguese wikipedia do some editing in a couple of pages I watch, and before I send him a sermon, I wanted to have appropriate justification, if any. If there is no policy, then I will leave him/her to it, and be a little more wiser. Thanks. ZEORYMER (talk) 11:31, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

This is Misplaced Pages: we have policies and guidelines for everything! In this case, MOS:UNLINKYEARS applies. Favonian (talk) 12:11, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

haha. Thanks ;) ZEORYMER (talk) 20:40, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Some copy and pasting that needs revision history trail

Forgive me if I'm in the wrong place. I'm bring this to you for the sole reason that you are an admin. I was surprised to find the page Can Xue recently which is a copy and paste from a userspace draft at User:Metal.lunchbox/Can Xue. Naturally I don't mind that my work was copied, as I was writing the page for the whole purpose of moving it to mainspace, eventually, but it was just a single paragraph. The copy was made by User:2sc945 and I believe it was a good faith effort to improve wikipedia, but it doesn't fit with some copyright stuff and my ego-driven desire to have my username in the revision history of so many wikipedia articles. Can you fix this, or should I just forget about it? - Metal lunchbox 09:01, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Nothing wrong with having a healthy ego, and you are certainly entitled to attribution for your part in building the article. I merged the edit histories of your sandbox version and that of the other user. Please let me know if this solves the problem, though I may be editing infrequently today due to other obligations :) Favonian (talk) 10:21, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, looks good.- Metal lunchbox 10:40, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

	Merry Christmas
	May your Christmas sparkle with moments of love, laughter and goodwill, May the year ahead be full of contentment and joy, May the good times and treasures of the present become the golden memories of tomorrow, Merry Christmas To U & Ur Family. BabbaQ (talk) 19:06, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! The same to you and yours. Favonian (talk) 10:11, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

TheGeneralUser (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Hey Favonian! Wishing you a very Happy Merry Christmas :) TheGeneralUser (talk) 12:12, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, GU. You too! Favonian (talk) 12:28, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

..

Seasons greetings to you and yours
Dougweller (talk) 14:24, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Doug. Thanks a lot. Hope you're having a good time as well. Favonian (talk) 20:28, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Vandalism

Mr Favonian, What about vandalism happening in Nawaz Sharif by Imran Khan fans since 25th December 2012?? plz reply. See the history

Thanks.

The actions of others cannot be used as an excuse to commit vandalism. Favonian (talk) 20:27, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

4 tribes of Bavaria

Dear Favonian, I do not understand, what's going on. Bayern.de are official web sites of Bavaria. You shall read corretly. On http://www.bayern.de/History-and-Historic-Figures-.631/index.htm is ni quotation marks only the 4th tribe (Sudeten Germans), because that are refugees after 1945 (so called New Bavarians). Deleting of Saddhiyama was Vandalism (???) and Nazi (???). Deleting of Erikeltic was no comment. Return my version, please, like your good manners. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.195.215.190 (talk) 16:31, 26 December 2012‎ (UTC)

It is in fact the only occurrence of the word "tribe" that is quoted, showing that the authors of the web page don't mean for it to be taken literally. Even if they did, it wouldn't matter. It may be the official website of Bavaria, but it is written by the droids of the state's marketing department. The concept of tribe belongs to history/anthropology/sociology, and for it to be mentioned in the Misplaced Pages article would require a scholarly source, which I think you'll have a hard time locating. Your previous attempts have been reverted by several editors, therefore doing it again without prior consensus on the article talk page will amount to edit warring and lead to you being blocked temporarily from editing. Favonian (talk) 21:20, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

May be the 4th tribe of Bavaria is not tribe in in traditional scientific meaning. But, the 4th tribe of Bavaria is tribe in official/bureaucratic meaning. In detail: The "Fourth Tribe" - A fourth ethnic group, the Sudeten Germans, who constituted the largest number of refugees that made Bavaria their home after 1945, have joined the other three tribes. The Free State took them under its protection. "The Bavarian State Government regards the Sudeten Germans as one of the ethnic tribes of Bavaria", reads the Certificate of Investiture of 5.11.1962. Grateful to their new homeland, the "New Bavarians" have substantially contributed to rebuilding the State after the Second World War.

P. S. Who is Vandal and Nazist? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.195.215.190 (talk) 07:41, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

I never used any of those words. Since you have willfully ignored repeated warnings, I have reported the case to Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Favonian (talk) 09:41, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Help me please.

Help Please

The User:Nymf makes all undo what I edit in Misplaced Pages Article. I need help please. He undo all just annoy me. Without reference or without reason.

examples:

for example a new picture: http://en.wikipedia.org/Paul_Walker

list of Albanian americans delete he withot references and grounds. http://en.wikipedia.org/List_of_Albanian_Americans

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Arta,_Greece&action=history

from older revision: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Jim_Belushi&oldid=530122564

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=John_Belushi&oldid=530035768

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Masiela_Lusha&action=history

it can not go on like this.

Yours truly User:Anthony.al

Castle of São Jorge

Hello Favonian. I was kind of hoping you could clear-up a series of confusing actions at "Castle of São Jorge". One of my colleagues moved this article to "São Jorge Castle", without discussions, and had a change of heart. But, he then compounded the problem by moving the article to "Castle São Jorge". Is it possible for you revert the content back to the old "Castle of São Jorge" title, while maintaining the content? Otherwise, could you direct me to the correct path for resolving this strange turn of events? Appreciate your constant assistance. ZEORYMER (talk) 16:59, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Ruben. I have moved the article back to its original name, since everyone involved agreed to it. When I'm not around, Misplaced Pages:Requested moves/Technical requests is the place to request uncontroversial page moves. Favonian (talk) 20:58, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Srinivasa Ramanujan

..is in the news currently, I have gathered few references here. It seems to be an important event. Your opinion? --Tito Dutta (talk) 18:24, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Very interesting! It's probably legit, since Ken Ono is quoted. The problem is how to present the material with the proper balance between rigor and accessibility, and how to distribute it between the Ramanujan article and that on Theta functions. You might ask the good folks over at WT:MATH. Favonian (talk) 20:43, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Yes, exactly! I am not a contributor there, just a reader! I couldn't understand how to (and where) present this information? A new h2 or h3 section "Deathbed theory (of Ramanujan)"? "Of Ramanujan" will not be needed since the article is on him. And this will not be a cup of tea for me, it begins with a dream, some unheard functions and ends with blackhole..

Today, someone has posted in talk page, I have posted there Talk:Srinivasa_Ramanujan#Surprised_for_the_high_number_of_readers.3F --Tito Dutta (talk) 08:37, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Looks like it has started rolling. We need some sources that make more of the actual math and less of the dreams and divine inspiration. Regrettably, the media just love that stuff. Favonian (talk) 12:36, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Czechia

I've been called a lot of things on Misplaced Pages, but this is the first time for "deviant onanist" , probably for you too. Machine translation's a wonderful thing. Acroterion (talk) 04:46, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

He must have thought long and hard to come up with that one. I'm still mulling over this epithet, which I acquired nearly three years ago. ;) Favonian (talk) 12:32, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

The most creative in my experience was a threat directed at me: "Then im (sic) going to fill a sack with swallows and throw it at your car while you are driving to work." The event moved Tonywalton to create an alternate account, User:Sackful of swallows. Acroterion (talk) 18:09, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello

Hi Favonian, I'm Slurpy. I was wondering if you can do me a favor, you see, I have been dealing with some vandalism in this article:Cicero. And I am worried that it is exposed to vandalism and since vandalism in this article had happened before, I am worried it will happen again. I was wondering if you could put a semi-protection to the page, and since it is an important article, I'm asking if you could semi-protect it from vandalism, Thank you for your attention :) (Slurpy121 (talk) 02:05, 31 December 2012 (UTC))

To you

Favonian, I sent you a message but you didn't respond. I needed your help but you instead tend to threaten me, that is not in your position as an administrator my friend. I have two computers and two people in this location are wikipedia users, only i have an account. So like i asked again, Can i talk to an administrator?? (Slurpy121 (talk) 01:02, 1 January 2013 (UTC))

Favonian, I need a favor, please! (Slurpy121 (talk) 02:30, 1 January 2013 (UTC))

What on earth are you talking about? As far as I can tell, I have never interacted with you, let alone "threatened" you. Regarding the Cicero article, the level of vandalism does not merit protection. Rather than badger me, you should take such requests to Misplaced Pages:Requests for page protection. Favonian (talk) 19:18, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Sorry Favonian for the recent messages, I'm Slurpy but the actual User, the one you were talking to yesterday was supposed to help me rearrange and do my to-do list on Misplaced Pages, I see he didn't make a very good job, so I will be on the alert. Anyways, regarding the Cicero article, I believe it might run the risk of vandalism, but since you and I've seen the level of vandalism is low, I guess the semi-protection wont be necessary. Anyways, I will save you any troubles and just came by to leave you this message. Happy new Year. (Slurpy121 (talk) 20:06, 1 January 2013 (UTC))

Same to you, but I really must draw your attention to WP:NOSHARE. Accounts are for use by one person only. Favonian (talk) 20:18, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

The first part of the following post is a joke, don't take it seriously

Hello, Favonian, I am (also) Slurpy, the actual user. he he! sorry.. anyway, I have posted the Ramanujan issue at WP:RD/MA --Tito Dutta (talk) 02:26, 2 January 2013 (UTC) strike-through signed Tito Dutta (talk) 23:10, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Careful there! I'm a geek, and as such very literal-minded. You nearly got yourself blocked for that confession Favonian (talk) 22:53, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the revert and help on Limerick CC and my tp. Murry1975 (talk) 22:49, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

No problem! Always fascinating to watch such single-minded editing as that of Limerick City Council's most faithful foe. Favonian (talk) 22:51, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

remove extra marital affair from agakhan

Its not proved, content says affair with the air hostess but its the divorce case you can say she argued the affair in the court but its not proved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.98.51.150 (talk) 22:04, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages reports rumour rather than truth. Kittybrewster ☎ 12:48, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

General George Bingham Arbuthnot

Is there a case for undeleting this entry now that we have this fine picture of him? . Kittybrewster ☎ 12:48, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Certainly a strapping soldier and the very model of a not-so-modern major general, but as I understand the guidelines, the existence of a picture doesn't really add to the notability of a subject. Sorry. Favonian (talk) 12:54, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

How do I add the picture which is on wikicommons to the page which is deleted and resurrected under my user-moniker? Kittybrewster ☎ 19:21, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Exactly the same way you would, if the page were in article space. Had the picture been uploaded as "fair use", it would be inadmissible on user space pages, but images on commons are quite OK. Favonian (talk) 20:47, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

dot the i

Hello, regarding Dot the i and the request to move, it appears that the film's official title is "dot the i". Do you want to keep the article at its present location or move to "dot the i"? Link back to discussion here. Erik (talk | contribs) 16:47, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

That would be pointless, given Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions (capitalization)#Software characteristics. Favonian (talk) 19:48, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

I just noticed...

Sorry about that. If you think six months is better, I'm all for it. Cheers, Airplaneman ✈ 01:49, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

No reason to apologize! The longer the article is protected, the better. Favonian (talk) 06:53, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Cowan Dobson

Serious vandalism. Kittybrewster ☎ 20:15, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Indeed. Too ancient to do anything about the culprit(s) though. Favonian (talk) 20:23, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. Kittybrewster ☎ 20:50, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

A7

Hello,

RBRO Solutions has been deleted various times and the last time...I followed all the rules. I would appreciate you reconsidering and reviewing the last submission as I did specify why the topic/entry was significant. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.135.103.36 (talk) 20:41, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

There were no independent, reliable sources to provide evidence of notability as required by Misplaced Pages:Notability (organizations and companies). The only references were to the company's own website and the contents was so close to advertisement that it was touch and go whether to delete it per speedy deletion criterion G11 or A7. Favonian (talk) 20:57, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. Would you kindly delete the entire page itself? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.135.103.36 (talk) 16:44, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Not sure I understand your request. The article in question, RBRO Solutions, is quite gone. Favonian (talk) 17:12, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Favonian

Then maybe you might have an interest in joining WikiProject Gerald Ford! We're a group of editors working to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of the life, career, and presidency of Gerald Ford.

We're very much a new project, so you have the opportunity to help form the design and structure of the WikiProject itself in addition to creating and improving content about Ford. You are more than welcome to join us by adding your username under the "Participants" section of our WikiProject page. Everyone is welcome, and you are free to contribute where and when you like.

You received this invitation in view of your recent contributions to the Gerald Ford article. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 09:20, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Thank you for the quick reversion of new user page blanking of my user talk space - it's very appreciated! :) T.I.M 23:50, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

my talkpage

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my talkpage :) 81M (talk) 03:10, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

No problem. Probably won't be the last time, now that you're on this particular troll's "Christmas card list". Favonian (talk) 11:30, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

You were right, two more instances, I'm guessing this is some kind of revenge for listing him on WP:LTA. Any chance you could semi-protect my talkpage for a few days (or is that not allowed?) 81M (talk) 01:20, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Done. NawlinWiki (talk) 02:06, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Nawlin! 81M (talk) 02:42, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

I wish there was something else we could do, enough's enough with this guy. I almost want to propose him for community ban - I know probably wouldn't accomplish much in the short run (and the sensible side of me says it will likely just result in more attacks), but would it at least open up other options to get him to stop (e.g. pursuing abuse response with his ISP?) 81M (talk) 02:55, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure the possibility of a range block has been considered, but rejected because of the wide spread of the addresses used. Regarding the abuse response option, the way I read it, we need to know the IP addresses involved, and that would require CheckUser privileges. A community ban in itself wouldn't change much: no admin in his right mind will unblock this troll, and no revert of his actions is likely to be challenged, so I guess our preferred course of action is WP:RBI. Favonian (talk) 17:11, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello there

Favonian, I just saw you prevented an edit war in an article. I would like to ask your help, not as an admin necessarily, simply as an editor to come and see what is happening in Oktay Sinanoğlu article and add your input. Please do not tell me it is not an article whose subject-matter is not in your area of interest. The sources are there, the Talk Page is there, the "history" of the article is there. You can simply make a few edits, just as you consider correct, to put some fresh energy into something really very simple: To write a short article on a notable person, his life and works. This should not cause "storms" every now and then... Thanks for your possible help. --E4024 (talk) 22:26, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Took me a while to parse the triple negative in your message ;) Not sure I care to edit the article, but I have a couple of comments regarding the recent mini edit war: 1) "according to both Turkish Republic and U.S.A public records" is not a verifiable reference; 2) a book that is "told to" a writer by the subject of the book is still an autobiography. I'll try and keep an eye on the article, but bedtime is approaching in my time zone. Favonian (talk) 22:36, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	Hi Favonian, I just happened to stumble upon your page and i saw all the vandalism you have tirelessly reverted and corrected. Thanks for keeping wikipedia a safe and reliable place to get information out of! for this i award you the defender of the wiki barnstar. Manson35 (talk) 03:43, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

A semi-random thank you

Hey Favonian, I just happened to find your user page by luck when i was scrolling through the history of some wikipedia pages. I then happened to notice all the vandalism on wikipedia you have reverted/corrected! I decided to take the time to award you a barnstar and send you this message to tell you that people like you who draw the line for vandalism are not forgotten. Thank you and everyone else who tirelessly works to make sure wikipedia is a safe and reliable place to get information from!

Posted on behalf of Manson35 (talk · contribs) due to being wrongly caught in the edit filter.--Jasper Deng (talk) 04:03, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Indira Gandhi

I requested for help here after second revert. I feel some portion in their edit like "Gandhi made "illegal" changes to Indian constitution" needs to be sourced or clarified! --Tito Dutta (talk) 16:38, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

I tend to agree with you, but as it was I who blocked the IP for edit warring, I have to be a bit careful about undoing their contributions. Words like "involved admin" are used quite often in such situations. Favonian (talk) 16:42, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

I have 2 reverts there! (joking) Should I wait for 23 hours now and revert then? --Tito Dutta (talk) 16:50, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Well, WP:3RR says "must not perform more than three reverts", though WP:WAR warns against pushing it. Favonian (talk) 17:16, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting

... the vandal from my talk page. --Ben Ben (talk) 22:06, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Any time! Rather strange vandal, that one. Favonian (talk) 22:10, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Alexis Bledel semi-protect

Thanks for the year on this; I expected only two weeks but definitely a year should help shoo away all the minor vandals who change the slightest things in the article. Nate • (chatter) 11:57, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

My pleasure. The article has quite a long protection log, including a recent one-year semi, so this seemed like the right decision. Favonian (talk) 12:02, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Mehmed the Conqueror, encore

Hi. I don't know if you're up and about, but the tedious edit-war has resumed at Mehmed the Conqueror. Might another padlocking be in order, until talk-page consensus is reached? Haploidavey (talk) 12:29, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Personal life of Mehmed II

Recently I had a discussion with user:Surtsicna on the page of Mehmed the Conqueror. The dispute was about the sentence of Mehmed being attracted to both men and women, based on the source on the book of Franz Babinger (Mehmed the Conqueror and his Time), because the sentence presented it as if it was a fact. There was also criticism against this claim so I added that. (the claim is not accepted by Turkish and Ottoman historians).

So the sentence was changed to "Franz Babinger asserted that ...." It was discussed in the talk page

After that you protected the page and the dispute was kind of solved. Now, today the protection expired and immediately an anonymous and constantly changing IP is changing the sentence into "Mehmed was attracted..." and is presenting it as if it is a fact and he is also deleting that Ottoman historians do not mention it. And also deleting the criticism from Turkish historians.

Please could you add a protect from anonymous IPs template? For me this seems the only solution to protect the page from anonymous IPs. Also he personally attacks me by claiming that I am a "Turkish nationalist".

Furthermore I am planning to expand the entire article with more information, but I am now reluctant because it seems that many anonymous IPs are free to delete everything they don't agree with. Only registered users should be able to edit on this page.

Please consider WP:IDONTLIKEIT and the talk page. And stop reverting sourced content. It was discussed several times and is not meant for nationalist pov.--2001:4CA0:2201:1:F8CF:C308:7177:B941 (talk) 12:54, 21 January 2013 (UTC)