User talk:Brumburger

Nick Boulevard RfC

FYI, Nick B. seems to have used all the IPs in the range 195.92.67.65 - 78, plus 195.92.67.208 - 209. I've commented on the talk pages to indicate this; you will also find warnings to him about his behaviour on many of them (not all apply to him, of course, but many are for Birmingham-related articles). Andy Mabbett 14:51, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

And 81.76.10.16. Andy Mabbett 20:53, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

And 80.225.160.32 Andy Mabbett 28 June 2005 23:27 (UTC)

The difficulty being, then, that the address block (195.92.67.0 - 195.92.67.255) is the Energis UK backbone. I don't know how specific the sub-blocks get, but some of my edits before I signed up came out as 195.92.67.70, and I'm logging on via Wanadoo from Devon. All a good argument for banning anonymous access. RayGirvan 00:21, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I'd noticed that, and assumed it was Wanadoo (the numbers show up as the Planet Online webcache when you look them up, Planet being the ancestor of Freeserve and Wanadoo). It is usually pretty obvious which edits are by Nick, though. Look at the last paragraph of this addition to the GEC article, for example. A huge block of copyvio, a little irrelevant snippet about the Soho Engineering Works, and a date of March of this year (he's claiming now that all the copyright problems stem from when he was new here about a year ago). It's amazing how he has time to post huge rambling paragraphs of self-justification but is frequently "too busy" to type in three words to log on, and rather suspicious that (as far as I can tell) all the copyright violations have been made when he hasn't been logged on. --Brumburger 05:51, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Andy Mabbett, you have way too much time on your hands, creating different names just to formulate (in your mind) more powerful methods of attack against my username just out of a personal vendetta, there are many crimes in this world, people suffering of terrible illnesses etc, etc and YOU put ALL this energy into TRACKING MY EVERY MOVE HERE, wherever I turn you are editing or deleting, I don't mind that but THIS??? WHAT ARE YOU DOING? Nick Boulevard 22:42, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

That leaves much of the GEC article a blatant copyvio of Marconi's Everything Electrical piece. RayGirvan 18:30, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I think that Andy Mabbett is possibly all of or in some way connected to these users. Nick Boulevard 22:42, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

More abuse

See [1] and the original comment on that page. Andy Mabbett 21:07, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

OK you are over stepping the mark now, I am seriously concerned at your stalking nature, you are trying to trace my IP address???, what right do you have to do that, what next? I am going to bring this to others attention if you continue. Nick Boulevard 22:30, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Gun quarter

Thanks for pointing that out, there were so many talks, redirects and stuff I lost track of what I had and hadn't deleted.--nixie 10:50, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Calm

Thank you for your temperate comment on the RFC. It is this kind of reasoned response that was my wish. I am convinced that Nick can learn the local conventions here and so become a great asset.—Theo (Talk) 14:36, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Letting things go

Brumberger: Please would you disregard any accusations or criticisms that Nick may level against you, however unfair. If we could all focus on the articles instead of the editors we can all spend more time building the encyclopedia.—Theo (Talk) 19:11, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Theo, this is not possible. I am mailing you my reasons, but to put it simply you're asking me to allow Nick to break Wikipedia policy and guidelines with impunity. All I have ever asked is that he sticks to the rules and focuses on articles rather than editors. He doesn't seem to be able to do either, yet. --Brumburger 20:44, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Very much seconded. See User_talk:Raygirvan#Letting_things_go. RayGirvan 00:20, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Having received an email with clarification from Theo, while I still stick by the statement above, I have a better understanding of his reasons for this request. I am willing to work with anyone (Nick Boulevard included) who conforms to Wikipedia policies and guidelines, but I not going to allow personal abuse or gross breaches of acceptable conduct to go unchallenged. --Brumburger 08:46, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Having just seen this, I'm afraid any toleration or flexibility is out of the question. Wikipedia has lost a professional journalist who contributed a great deal of solid factual material and spent a lot of time explaining good practice to others, because of someone who has spent much of his time here breaking policies and antagonising others with no corrective action being taken. I am going to take this to arbitration as soon as I find the time. --Brumburger 09:33, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hi Brumburger, sorry if I have upset you in any way, I am prepared to forget the past and move on. I can assure you that if ever I have used mickey-taking or mockery as a weapon against you in the past it was most definately not meant with malice (I should know shouldn't I). We all have in common the enthusiasm to contribute really professional work to Wikipedia so lets capitalise on that fact. Theo has just been promoted here and he has been extremely tolerant and fair to all of us here, I think that we now owe it to him to at least try and start afresh, I am willing to have a go, and you?. Sorry for any offence caused in the past. Regards Nick. Nick Boulevard 16:52, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Too little, too late. --Brumburger 17:00, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Well thats up to you isn't it really, I'm certainly not grovelling here, since you appeared here you have never had a nice thing to say about me, and sided with another user whom I have a history of conflict with and yet even after all this I am willing to forget it... move on for the sake of wikipedia, life is short to hold grudges and bitterness is a great way to allow all the bad things iside you to fester and thrive so let it go, I don't quite understand your lack of compassion here but anyway it's your choice.. obviously, have a nice weekend. Nick Boulevard 17:48, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Proto/ Theo

Please see User_talk:TheoClarke#Proto which discusses coments referring to you. Andy Mabbett 5 July 2005 14:23 (UTC)

Driving Ray Girvan Away

I had time for Ray Girvan, and it's a shame he's gone - but note that User:172 was driven away by Mabbett not Boulevard. Both users have behaved inappropriately at points and both have caused highly capable editors to give up on the project. Leonig Mig 8 July 2005 09:53 (UTC)

Your cliam is a bare-faced lie. Andy Mabbett 8 July 2005 18:04 (UTC)

My claim is backed by evidence [2]. Leonig Mig 12:25, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

Not only does the page you cite not provide any evidence to back your bare- faced lie; the evidence that it is a lie is easily found. Andy Mabbett 13:53, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

When you've been on the internet as long as me you'll realise people always come back. You also learn that even the most backward of trolls gets the message eventually. Leonig Mig 14:27, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

LOL.. I did not drive away Ray Girvan, Ray drove himself away, I welcome him back anyday (unless he's already here) provided he refrains from his spiteful personal abuse. By the way, I'm sure that Ray and Brumburger are different people now, couldn't help but notice that after a long campagne of daily edits by Brumburger he/she unusually ceased all edits for over two weeks immediately the day after Ray Girvan resigned from wikipedia, Ray Girvans account is dead whilst Brumburger picked up where he left off on the 7th of July for just two edits both relating to me :). Andy Mabbett continues his relentless edits, mostly pertaining to the London Bombings. By the way Leon, your doing some great work here, same as G-man etcNick Boulevard 23:34, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you. Please fell free to e-mail me. Andy Mabbett 11:07, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

• Please do so. Also, see [3]. Andy Mabbett 22:18, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

==You might want to== ... see this. Andy Mabbett 23:56, 22 November 2005 (UTC)