User talk:CAtruthwatcher

Your message

I'm trying to work with yet another editor who blanks his page, not liking what he sees, I suppose. I seldom do that.

Anyway, odd you should come to me. I left a note for Elkevbo the other day that I agreed with him so much that I was concerned about replying on discussion pages for fear people would think I was his sockpuppet. He replied that he had been accused of that already himself! By you, apparently.

I frequently agree with him, as stated. Probably his edits as well. Elkevbo has been on "awhile." I suppose it is possible that he constructs sockpuppets. Stranger things have happened. I would find it hard to believe, though. He seems to me to be a responsible editor. Like I try to be. I may joke on a discussion page and sometimes put unpleasant sarcasm on edit summary lines that might have been better left out, in retrospect. But I do try.

You have to appreciate that he is, like me, a generalist, not an article-specific editor. He looks at many articles, some of the type I edit. Schools. So his opinions are gleaned, like mine, from seeing a lot of "stuff" and sometimes getting an idea of what an article should look like. Article-specific editors are the ones I would think would get so desperate as to use sockpuppets to grind their axe. More to the point - it's unlikely that he has developed a hatred for St. Johns or something. Whatever it looks like to you, he is trying to be objective. I think.

I eye-balled what I could of St. John University and superficially didn't seem to have any problem with Elkevbo's edits. My take is that material has to be germane, important, footnoted, long-term, that sort of thing. On WP:TOPIC. Some editors tend to wander sometimes.

I don't mind looking at something specific, but I have warned you that Elkevbo and I tend to see eye-to-eye. I guess you will just have to believe I am not a sockpuppet! :) Or maybe check me out! :) I would like to help make peace here if I can. Student7 (talk) 02:07, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I never thought you were a vandal. Obstreperous, maybe. Also there were edits under another IP, which seemed like inadvertent sockpuppets (done on random machines) to me/us. When I was looking for a block to force discussion, I did try to block one of the IPs, but maybe that was you. I didn't know. Because people disagree with you, it is easy to think of them as vandals. Since you weren't discussing, I wasn't totally sure. Student7 (talk) 02:29, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes, it helps to stand back and look at someone else. Take a look at Gospel of Luke. And NO, I'm not trying to get you involved! Too many cooks already! But now look at the edit history and those made by user RomanHistorian along with his comments on the discussion page, not a bad fellow and not a bad editor, but, well, see for yourself. Student7 (talk) 02:29, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dallas

Well, I'm glad we got that straight! Whew! Student7 (talk) 02:15, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you must sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 03:19, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]