User:Wee Curry Monster\Sandpit


 * It is neither defamation nor harassment to accurately describe an opinion that an editor has themselves expressed. See w:Talk:David Jewett for example, Langus has repeatedly expressed the main reason for removing the word "pirate" is that this is detrimental to Argentina's sovereignty claim.  For over 10 years we've seen the same pattern of behaviour of removing material for reasons incompatible with the aims of the wiki foundation .  We see a similar pattern of editing here, first he denies that reliable sources say it, you provide a source, he'll try to claim that the source is unreliable, then he says that we can't use that source because its a "British POV" and finally when you provide sourcing showing its commonly accepted term in British, Argentine and independent academic text he just revert wars.  And to be honest I'm tired that he brings up the same argument every single time. I would like to be able to edit in an environment where I can work with people who are interested in promoting knowledge on a topic not promoting nationalism.  One of the next projects I had in mind was to transcribe the Portuguese trial record when Jewett was convicted in absentia for piracy.  However, I'm inclined to ask myself why I would bother if all I get is grief from editors whose objection to my edits has no ground in policy and they have the backing of an admin to do so. Wee Curry Monster (talk) 12:53, 8 September 2021 (UTC)