Talk:A. W. Peet/Archive 1
Latest comment: 6 years ago by Filmman3000 in topic Irrelevant - need to be deleted!
 | This is an archive of past discussions about A. W. Peet. 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. |
| Archive 1 |
Irrelevant - need to be deleted!
To debate Peterson does not make him important. He did the article probably themselves. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.78.132.125 (talk) 23:09, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
- The article history is easy to review. --Fæ (talk) 07:10, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
- Dear Fae, don't worry IP address is a (redacted). Look I happen to agree with Peterson in that debate, and you probably thinks the other way. Look I've seen part of Peet's lectures it's fine. The IP is so easily triggered a it's hard to know if which type of snowflake he is. But probably one that thinks that ignoring good manners, is great way to make a point. This guy stalked all my edits and wrote stuff like this talk page of article I've contributed. He wasn't all wrong but just an (redacted) in his approach.
- I'll have a master editor check if this is a violations of Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy. Saying on an accomplished professor' page that the person is irrelevant and insinuating that the professor created the page while Fae has a clear history of editing random article on LGTBQ matters is absolutely defamatory. Filmman3000 (talk) 01:42, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
- I confused him with the IP address who gave you the notability sticker. Still an (redacted)Filmman3000 (talk) 01:47, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
- I'll have a master editor check if this is a violations of Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy. Saying on an accomplished professor' page that the person is irrelevant and insinuating that the professor created the page while Fae has a clear history of editing random article on LGTBQ matters is absolutely defamatory. Filmman3000 (talk) 01:42, 31 August 2018 (UTC)