SkipCaptcha
92
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 132:
Line 132: + + + + + + + + + +
More trolling
That user has gone on to add inaccurate information on a number of articles dealing with the US budget process. He took an accurate article on "spending authority" which last edited in 2008 and redirected it to an article that he had just written called "backdoor spending authority", when I restored the article, he started a thread at [[User_talk:Aschlafly#Spending_authority_vs_Backdoor_spending_authority]] and got the redirect protected. He has gone on to make a number of very inaccurate statements, such as that Presidents do not sign/veto "continuing resolutions" and that the President has not submitted a budget. He confuses spending authority with borrowing authority, etc. This matter requires the attention of senior editors. Thanks, [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 13:09, 12 January 2013 (EST)
That user has gone on to add inaccurate information on a number of articles dealing with the US budget process. He took an accurate article on "spending authority" which last edited in 2008 and redirected it to an article that he had just written called "backdoor spending authority", when I restored the article, he started a thread at [[User_talk:Aschlafly#Spending_authority_vs_Backdoor_spending_authority]] and got the redirect protected. He has gone on to make a number of very inaccurate statements, such as that Presidents do not sign/veto "continuing resolutions" and that the President has not submitted a budget. He confuses spending authority with borrowing authority, etc. This matter requires the attention of senior editors. Thanks, [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 13:09, 12 January 2013 (EST)
:I have had suspicions about that user since he made some additions to the LBJ article that were well over the top. After I questioned those additions they received the approval of a senior admin, which kind of shows my place around here. I will take a look and see what I can do. I must say that I am no expert on the inner workings of the US government. --[[User:DamianJohn|DamianJohn]] 16:10, 12 January 2013 (EST)
:I have had suspicions about that user since he made some additions to the LBJ article that were well over the top. After I questioned those additions they received the approval of a senior admin, which kind of shows my place around here. I will take a look and see what I can do. I must say that I am no expert on the inner workings of the US government. --[[User:DamianJohn|DamianJohn]] 16:10, 12 January 2013 (EST)
==More Trolling==
:Hi Damian.
:I have to say I'm quite at a loss for why you recently banned me from editing for a day with an explanation of 'trolling'. Let's look at the events:
:1) In August 2012 I expanded this article from what was basically a stub
:2) Between December 24th and January 5th [[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] removed/altered two innocuous examples without explanation (or at least with only the spurious explanation of 'punctuation')
:3) On 27 Jan I reinstated the deleted examples, providing evidence for why they were relevant
:4) On the same day you reverted my changes, still without explanation, and banned me form editing for 24 hours
: So which of us is exhibiting troll-like behaviour? --[[User:DHouser|DHouser]] 10:29, 29 January 2013 (EST)