Tholen on Wikipedia

Right on cue, completely anal retentive kookdancing queen, Dickless
Davie
the "irrelevaant" Ignoranus, whined and tholed
like the
antagonistic arsehole that he is:
Lora Crighton writes:

Prai Jei wrote:

wrote:

Tholen is repeatedly deleting the section in his Wikipedia article on
his substantial history of USENET kookery.

On what basis do you claim that it's Tholen? The edits have come from more than
one source.

It's just an example of a reading comprehension problem on the part of
stevenflonken.

You mean "readign" "comprehenion" problems, Dickless.

Note that three of the edits on May 27 were made by someone with IP address
68.164.54.164, and then note the header from stevenflonken's USENET posting:

] From:
] Newsgroups: rec.music.classical,comp.os.os2.advocacy,alt.usene t.kooks
] Subject: Tholen on Wikipedia
] Date: 26 May 2007 17:29:59 -0700
] Organization: http://groups.google.com
] Lines: 6
] Message-ID: om
] NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.164.54.164

Apparently stevenflonken is whining because somebody with IP address
69.136.127.78 countered his efforts to use Wikipedia as a kook playground.

You mean you were fraudulently altering his edits, Tholoon.

Anyone interested can see
the article he
the history of the deletions/restores he

Can they secure this page against amendments, as they have done with various
pages about Northern Ireland politics?

It's been done, although not permanently - the protection expires Aug 5th.

Didn't stop Cjewell. But Steel359 took action again. Will Yamaguchi's
efforts prove more effective? Tune in tomorrow for another episode of
"As the Kooks Turn".

Will you be turning again tomorrow, Dickless? My, that comes as a
complete surprise to all of us.

One of the people adding the usenet history asked for protection, and got his
wish, but the result is not quite as he intended - his edits were reversed first.

How long will it take for stevenflonken to claim that Steel359 and
Yamaguchi are just Tholen?

Are these more of your socks, Dickless?

"Michael Baldwin, Bruce" wrote in message
oups.com...
Right on cue, completely anal retentive kookdancing queen, Dickless
Davie
the "irrelevaant" Ignoranus, whined and tholed
like the
antagonistic arsehole that he is:
Lora Crighton writes:

Prai Jei wrote:

wrote:

Tholen is repeatedly deleting the section in his Wikipedia article
on
his substantial history of USENET kookery.

On what basis do you claim that it's Tholen? The edits have come from
more than
one source.

It's just an example of a reading comprehension problem on the part of
stevenflonken.

You mean "readign" "comprehenion" problems, Dickless.

Note that three of the edits on May 27 were made by someone with IP
address
68.164.54.164, and then note the header from stevenflonken's USENET
posting:

] From:
] Newsgroups: rec.music.classical,comp.os.os2.advocacy,alt.usene t.kooks
] Subject: Tholen on Wikipedia
] Date: 26 May 2007 17:29:59 -0700
] Organization: http://groups.google.com
] Lines: 6
] Message-ID: om
] NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.164.54.164

Apparently stevenflonken is whining because somebody with IP address
69.136.127.78 countered his efforts to use Wikipedia as a kook
playground.

You mean you were fraudulently altering his edits, Tholoon.

Anyone interested can see
the article he
the history of the deletions/restores he

Can they secure this page against amendments, as they have done with
various
pages about Northern Ireland politics?

It's been done, although not permanently - the protection expires Aug
5th.

Didn't stop Cjewell. But Steel359 took action again. Will Yamaguchi's
efforts prove more effective? Tune in tomorrow for another episode of
"As the Kooks Turn".

Will you be turning again tomorrow, Dickless? My, that comes as a
complete surprise to all of us.

One of the people adding the usenet history asked for protection, and
got his
wish, but the result is not quite as he intended - his edits were
reversed first.

How long will it take for stevenflonken to claim that Steel359 and
Yamaguchi are just Tholen?

Are these more of your socks, Dickless?


Or tweetie's socks. How is the substatiation going, Nightingale - when can
we expect a revised article that actually cites its references?