User:DeFacto replaced the existing text entitled "Legal Requirements" in the article Metrication in the United Kingdom with his own text. The principal source of original text was a summary of UK legislation which was published by an official UK authority complete with official summary. DeFacto, who has a track record of hostility to metrication, is insisting that his version is more accurate. When I tried to reinstate the original version (here), DeFacto reverted with the comment: "Replaced bad-faith and unjustified restoration of poor quality, inaccurate and unsupported content with something accurate and verifiable (see talk) - more references pending" (15:13 23 February 2012) I refused to discuss the matter with him until I had received an unconditional apology for his behaviour. The best that he did was to restate why he believed his version was better - something which I rejected. After I tried again to reinstate the original version, he revoked, calling the original version "discredited" (19:48 3 March 2012). I demanded an apology, but none was forthcoming.
Immediately before this episode took place, DeFacto's proposals regarding more prominent use of imperial measure in the Hindhead Tunnel article (here) and on WP:MOSNUM (here) had been rejected. He then totally removed a section from the article Metrication in the United Kingdom (since restored) and added banners to four other section (diffs here]. The dispute above was initiated when I removed the banner from the article "Legal Requirements" and reinstated the section that he had removed.
Finally, while I was preparing this argument, Defacto twice trespassed on my userspace and deleted the draft.
- Martin: You and DeFacto have a long history of warring over Metrication in the United Kingdom. DeFacto does also appear to have a track record for aggressive editing and edit-wars on other subjects, judging by comments on his home page! I've had tussles with him myself. However, I don't really want to get pulled into a scrap between you and him, because (as you rightly point out) he generally seems to be pushing an anti-metric POV, and I (like you) am of a strong pro-metric POV. (talk) 12:36, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
- Crikey - I just read the Hindhead Tunnel talk page. I wish I hadn't! DeFacto (whoever he or she is) has waaay too much time on his or her hands and really needs to get out more. Indeed if he/she got out more he/she might realise that the UK isn't the same place as it was in 1955 which would appear to be the last time he/she stepped out of his/her front door! I shall revise my comment above about DeFacto "generally seems to be pushing an anti-metric POV" to "finds any excuse to use imperial measures, even if they're utterly inappropriate for the job in hand and won't listen to anyone else on the subject". Its a weird obsession - maybe there's a name for it. Steve Hosgood (talk) 13:32, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
- [...] So any comments from me on the subject are hardly likely to be seen to be impartial! However, for the good of Wikipedia I feel that 'Metrication in the United Kingdom' is beyond repair and ought to just be deleted and rewritten from scratch by a team of non-British neutral-POV editors, and then be given "protected" status so that neither you, nor DeFacto (nor I) can p*ss around with it any more! It baffles me how such a boring subject as the use (or not) of a given measurement system can raise such passions in people - the recent spat about bl**dy Asda and their strawberries must rank along with The First World War as the most pointless waste of time and effort seen on the surface of any so-called civilised planet in the galaxy!
If you reckon you have any proof that DeFacto deleted stuff from your userspace, then that would be a matter for the Wikipedia Police - take it there. Steve Hosgood (talk) 12:36, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
- That's interesting! I've just spotted that one of the administrators has protected the page! Steve Hosgood (talk) 12:41, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
- Steve Hosgood. Wash your mouth out with soap. Do not disparage DeFacto. We have here a truly remarkable editor who can read the minds of the entire UK population.--Charles (talk) 14:32, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
- Ah - thank you for that reference, Charles. I would say "delusional editor" rather than "remarkable editor" based on that gem! I would agree that "ton" and "tonne" are pronounced the same, but "long ton the assumed default" my arse!
- <CHOMP>
- Hey - this soap is really delicious! :-) Steve Hosgood (talk) 17:40, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
- Good ol' User:DeFacto - you can never keep him quiet! He's just appeared on Tom Morris's talk page requesting to be allowed access to MitUK so he (or she?) might carry on "improving" it. I added a comment to that :-) .... Steve Hosgood (talk) 00:10, 7 March 2012 (UTC)