User talk:Trontonian

Welcome to the Wikipedia. You're an arrogant git, aren't you?

Ah, the campaign begins. Someone questions the opinion of someone in the oligarchy that runs this place and all of a sudden he's being told he's an arrogant git. No justification offered, no evidence, no nothing. Hey -- and no name! Trontonian

T -- thanks for the explanation. You may note, however, that the plethora of people attacking my work on the Frankish (NOT French) kings and monarchy were all Canadian, or claimed to be. That is, a group of self-proclaimed Canadians (or perhaps just one person acting as a group) purposefully denigrated my work and my character on many pages. It was that group (IIRC, I said you Canadians) to which I referred, and not to Canadians in general. Otherwise, I would have said, "what is it with Canadians"?

Either way, the problem is that of your fellow countrymen who have abused the wikipedia and other wikipedians. My questions was in fact genuine -- is there some particular reason that the origins of France and the French monarchy seem to be so near and dear to (at least some of) Your hearts? This is the last I'm saying on the matter. I'm not sure you aren't just another DW incarnation, unfortunately, and I have been cleaning up in order to remove myself from the wikipedia. JHK

Thanks for the reply, but I cannot seriously believe that a person of your obvious intelligence would think that "you Canadians" doesn't refer to all Canadians. Anyway, even if you were referring only to the Canadians who were giving you prtoblems, what does their nationality have to do wiith it? Oh, well -- I don't think you should be hanged for saying it, and Canada is still thriving even though you haven't apologized. All the best. Trontonian

No problem -- and sorry you've taken any offense at what was a remark made in frustrated response to continued harassment by your countrymen -- and I am actually still interested in the question. Is there some reason that the Merovingians being "French" matters so much to Canadians, or is is just the group that ended up here? I may not respond, BTW -- I am trying to end my contributions here. It is far too draining and time-consuming. JHK

I'm going to have to start an article about Wikinoia. The psychological basis seems to be an inability to respond constructively to criticism (for example, by refuting it). Instead people invent bugbears who are persecuting them. Anyway, send me an e-mail (if you're worried about revealing your identity, open a yahoo or Hotmail account) and I'll tell you who I am. I'm not DW, as anyone with any sense for writing style should be able to figure out. Trontonian

Maybe we can all just leave that alone? Apologies if my comments offended, and hope you understand that there are reasons for the DW paranoia. I think that will calm itself, left alone, but so many people were caught up in mass damage control and self defense that your comments just seemed more of the same. JHK

And it's the information age, eh? I'm not normally keen on apologies, but thanks for yours, which are appreciated perhaps more than you know. Like many others here, I encourage you to keep contributing. Trontonian

Thanks -- oh and since we all figured Jacques Delson was an incarnation of DW ... ;-) JHK

Yeah, but there are some amazing coincidences on this site involving me and Jacques, but not involving me and DW. I suppose DW may be a criminal mastermind of the first order as many here seem to believe, but I find it hard to believe that someone could develop such distinct personalities. Or is the idea that he had multiple personality disorder? Could be, I guess.

I am sure you can understand the problems caused with DW, He assumed a wide variety of identities and showed an interest in a wide range of topics, including history and sport. Many of his contributions took the form of lists which I suspect were copied from one or more books of lists. (Many of his illustrations added to wiki looked like they came from a textbook too.) So people are more than a little touchy, given the scale of his abuse, etc. The fact that he made a big issue of Canada and any perceived slights on Canada (usually all in his own head) means that anyone defending Canada immediately raises suspicions especially if they touch any of his topics, of which history was one. FearÉIREANN 20:53 4 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Thanks, FearÉIREANN. I have a further comment on your talk page.

As a Canadian who has edited history and sports pages, I am somewhat jealous that I have not been accused of being DW yet :) Adam Bishop 21:14 4 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I have to admit it was fun while it lasted. Trontonian

Sorry, BTW if you thought I was attacking Canadians. It was not meant to sound that way. The irony is that DW was a superb contributor if only he would stop downloading propably copyright material and then abusing anyone who asked a question about their source. It might be a red herring but one person with a medical background on wiki did observe that both Michael and DW in their editing style showed characteristics of a particular form of mentall illness whereby they know facts and have a fascination with lists (apparently the most striking characteristic of this illness) but have a problem in terms of social skills, in dealing with criticism, in accepting limits to what they can do. People with this illness when twarted usually resort to abuse and think that they are being treated less fairly than everyone else. In addition their lack of judgement leads them to mix up facts and fiction and be puzzled when picked up on this. Curiously, when I did a net search using a particular name DW used, the only mention anywhere linked up to a Canadian mental institution. Those who made these observations (and a couple have now) may be completely on the wrong track, but both Michael and DW showed a particular association with a number of striking characteristics, most notably lists, they continually not just doing lists but revisiting the same lists under each new identity. That's the theory anyway. I'm not saying I agree with it, mind. FearÉIREANN 23:15 4 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Sorry -- I never meant to imply you said anything anti-Canadian. More about this on your user page. Trontonian

No prob. BTW I have deleted my earnier insinuation that you are DW. I am sure it was very hard for people looking on to understand what the furore was over DW. In my eight months or so on wiki (God I really must check how long I actually have been on!), in fact in real life I have never ever come across anyone like DW. To use an Irish saying, "he'd scare the bejaysus" out of you (he threatened to sue me twice under two identities, called Zoe a "moron" and "braindead", verbally abused most people to clashed with him (by clash, I mean ask him for an explanation about something). Other times he could be incredibly nice. There is a strong suspicion that he was JD. JD started off extremely nice and helpful, then brutually abused some people using the same verbal attacks as DW, appeared I think the same day as another DW 'identity' was rumbled, disappeared and coincidentially was replaced the same day by another DW 'identity' and all three, the earlier DW identity rumbled, JD and the later DW edited the same pages in the same style using the same grammar and came from the same IP range in Canada. But in any case, enough of DW. Suffice to say dealing with him was a deeply unpleasant experience that I hope you never face, though knowing DW I expect he will re-appear in yet another 'secret' identity! (Someone suspiciously like him has already been caught once since the IP range was unblocked!) Anyway, take care. lol FearÉIREANN 01:39 5 Jul 2003 (UTC)

---

Yep - we do have a house style for bio dates. Check out Wikipedia:Biography standards. Information on exactly where somebody was born is not that important so long as the person's nationality is in the first line. --mav