User talk:Jafeluv

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Please do not use the revert tool[edit]

The revert tool is for reverting obvious repeated vandalism. Please provide informative edit summaries for your edits, particularly when making deletions of talk page discussion comments of Wikiversity community members. --JWSchmidt 14:57, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I did. Jafeluv 14:58, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • What specific "non-public personal information" were you referring to . Whose name and/or e-mail address were you protecting? —Albatross 15:02, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Non-public personal information[edit]

Please describe the nature of the "non-public personal information". --JWSchmidt 04:20, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Real names and email addresses of people who have not made that information public. Jafeluv 11:19, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Jafeluv, how do you know that the real names and email addresses are not public? --JWSchmidt 12:33, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am prepared to demonstrate that they are public. Howeer, that's a red herring, since the purpose of posting the direct evidence was to falsify the tortious remarks of SBJ on his user page on the English Wikiversity. —Moulton 00:37, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Size of the deleted content[edit]

It appears that a large amount of content was deleted (oversighted) from this page, but it is claimed that the "private information" was an email address and a name. I never saw any information on that page that was private. If it is true that the name and email address were private, then why was such a large amount of content deleted? --JWSchmidt 14:19, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As I've said on Matanya's page, if you think the suppression was done against policy you're welcome to ask for a review of the action by an uninvolved party. Jafeluv 15:09, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I, for one, would like a review by a high-level official who is answerable to the Board of Trustees of the WMF. —Moulton 00:33, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It seems more efficient to just undo the disruption of this wiki caused by outside invaders who are unable to justify their actions here. --JWSchmidt 15:29, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]