User talk:JeremyA/Archive02

DO NOT EDIT OR POST REPLIES TO THIS PAGE. THIS PAGE IS AN ARCHIVE.

This archive page covers approximately the dates between 25 June 2005 and 24 July 2005.

Post replies to the main talk page, copying the section you are replying to if necessary. (See Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page.)

Thank you. JeremyA (talk) 03:08, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

• Previous archive page: User talk:JeremyA/Archive01.
• Next archive page: User talk:JeremyA/Archive03.

---

Thanks!

Well. After that recent bout of vandalism on my user page, I feel like I should thank you for reverting it (and reverting it again, and again...) for me. You are truly very Wiki-nice, er, something. So thank you! --Dmcdevit 04:08, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Request for Arbitration against User:JarlaxleArtemis

This message is to inform you that a Request for Arbitration has been initiated against the user JarlaxleArtemis. Since you have been affected by this user's behaviour [1], you are invited to join yourself to the proceedings and/or present evidence at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/JarlaxleArtemis_2/Evidence. —Psychonaut 29 June 2005 15:48 (UTC)

JeremyA how did you notice my edits so quickly?

I await your reply, TIA!

Norfolk Hawker

Looks good now - thanks - SP-KP 2 July 2005 20:00 (UTC)

Deletion of my page

I would like you to tell me what a vexiologist is witout using a serch engine,dictionary,or encylopedia

there are many other pages with micronations why are you not going after them

let me see you make a flag —Preceding unsigned comment added by User:Dudtz (talk • contribs) 15:26, 2 July 2005

Thanks Jeremy, I'll reply over on my talk page (in a few moments), so that it's easier to follow the discussion. Tannin 3 July 2005 00:16 (UTC)

You're welcome

...And I love the message you've left to editors of your userpage. Not many things make me literally laugh aloud, but that did it. Joyous (talk) July 3, 2005 05:13 (UTC)

Urethral gland

You removed the speedy tag from Urethral Gland but did not indicate on the article's talk page why you did so. Please note that the tag specifically asks that you leave a reason on the article's talk page if you decide to remove a tag. That is the only way other editors will know why it was removed. Denni☯ 2005 July 3 18:19 (UTC)

• Hi Jeremy. My concern with speedy tags attached without indicating which criteria are being used is that as the second person to the table, I have no idea why the original nominator wanted the article deleted, and hence have no way to either concur or disagree. Sometimes it's pretty obvious and a lack of info is not a big hindrance; other times, particularly when I disagree with the tag, it's hard to comment on the talk page as to the rationale for retaining the article. Thanks for getting back to me - I know we have the same interest in assuring quality here. I did not re-tag the article; I feel it's still a little too guilty of stating the obvious, but there may be room for growth. I'm prepared to be patient and se what happens. Denni☯ 2005 July 4 01:54 (UTC)

John Reuben

Biggest problems with some of these malformed nanostubs is the fact that so many are orphaned. If you have some info on this fellow, why not recreate the article? A good, short article beats a red link...but a redlink IMO beats a half-baked nano.  :) Anyway, thanks for the note. Hope this helps. - Lucky 6.9 4 July 2005 06:10 (UTC)

Page protection

Thanks for your kind message on my talk page! I've posted a reply there... -- MarioR 4 July 2005 18:34 (UTC)

Transnistria

Hi JeremyA, I was not aware of Gaidash's request to you for protection when I was filing one on my own at User_talk:Ambi#Protection_requested_for_Transnistria. I respect your decision to keep a close watch rather than place a protection. I just wanted you to be aware of my action taken prior to that. Whether or not the article will end up being protected, thanks for keeping an eye on it.

I think whether or not Vasile gets a 24-hour block for 3-RR violation, eventually it is possible to work with him on the article, although with difficulty. He, at least, seems to read the comments and respond to some. As for Duca and Mihaitza, they are well over the line. With RfC properly filed they may well end up sanctioned but I am not motivated enough to spend time on that.

I view that frivolous editing and bad faith arguing at the talk page may be the reason for RfC but not the protection. I only requested the protection because the users remove the POV tag clearly in a bad faith and there is nothing else that could be done about it. Protection would allow emotions to cool off and changes discussed at talk, while the POV tag would warn the unfamiliar users to treat the article with caution. With best regards, -Irpen July 4, 2005 20:47 (UTC)

Blocking of IP or accounts or whatever

I still have no confidence in you whatsoever. The revert rule, edit rule or whatever at the Wikipedia, as well as the "Help/Contact Us" link is confusing and gives no possibility for users to easily get in contact with any one responsible or legal person. The Wikipedia site is a site with expertise in dudging the responsibilities. That is my opinion anyway. If I want a page removed, I cannot do that. If I edit it, then 10 seconds later, it is edited right back. If I do this 3 times (honestly and using ONLY ONE ACCOUNT) my IP is blocked. THAT is not responsibility. On the contrary. As a great number of pages at the Wikipedia site is hosting misconduct and defamation, I must say, that anyone mentioned there, should be allowed unlimited access and unlimited numbers of edit options. If not, the Wikipedia is indeed accessory to misconduct and defamation. This makes you as well as anyone else in here just as responsible as the one writing the false propaganda and lies. Once again, I urge the Wikiepedia to REMOVE once and for all, any article in regard to GENSEIRYU, Gensei-Ryu, myself (Peter Lee) and the like. These sites have been and are still subject to lies and false propaganda, misconduct and defamation in such a degree that the people involved with it have no sense of responsibility or morals at all. Even though the facts contradict all the articles, the Wikipedia is one sided and keep banning IPs of the ones only defending themselves. I understand the nature of the Wikipedia site, but in this case, the Wikipedia is not the place for such articles. They should be REMOVED once and for all. As is the case with the same articles in the Dutch section. Anything else would be irresponsible indeed. You say that I can edit the texts, how an ridiculous argument. Then we simply have an edit war. And as I am an honest person, using only ONE account, I will just be banned by people like you who have no knowledge whatsoever about the things in question here. So for this and other reasons, the articles should be removed COMPLETELY. It is a pity, that you obviously do not agree, but some does. Otherwise the Dutch section articles would not have been removed I guess. Please see to it, that these articles are removed. That is the only decent thing to do.

I did not bomb your e-mail box. If such a thing occured anyway, then perhaps you should tink of other ways this could have happened, instead of simply accusing me of having done so diliberately. And now we are at it. I could not find the way to send another mail to you, thus I wrote here. Peter Lee 5 July 2005 19:34 (UTC)

Thanks for your input. But still I do not agree with you on all issues. As defamation and inclusions of deliberate inaccurate information is placed in articles time and time again, despite the fact, that I and other people edit them, then you still would have the edit war, which is not allowed. You also state, that I could put the vfd etc. on the articles (I thought I did that, but you for one just removed it and blocked my IP). I do not have unlimited time in my life to spend only at one place. Life is not Wikipedia to me. It is a place of defamation and misconduct in the articles mentioned to you earlier. Writing a neutral edit?? Hmmm, WHAT is that. Nothing is neutral. How can it be neutral? It is impossible to write anything neutral, unless all parts of the articles include topics which everyone can agree upon. And that is just the problem, Mario Roering does not agree with anyone other than himself, despite facts and evidence, and he forces his opinion onto others. The Wikipedia site is just one site among many. He creates sites on the Internet with defamatory contents, lies and false propaganda whenever he want. He even did it on the www.angelfire.com site who have a hosting resource for free there. I contacted the Angelfire site, and after only 24 hours they agreed that the contents was indeed defamatory, and they removed the site completely. Now he is at it again with the same homepage but using another URL. The EXACT same thing is going on here at the Wikipedia site. AND IT MUST STOP. If you cannot tell me who to contact in order to get this removed, then perhaps it would be better to simply commence an edit war, and then see how the servers and public at the Wikipedia would take that. This is not a threat, but I have tried to talk to both you and others here at the Wikipedia site, people whom I take as responsible people, but nothing helps. Mario Roering is being helped and assisted at the Wikipedia site in his misconduct, defamation, lies etc. So even when you say that you did not block me in order to cencor me, well, I take your word for it this time, but it sure looked like it at first. The articles about Genseiryu are so full of errors, lies and personal attacks, that they should be removed. If I start to edit them (as I have done many times before), I will just be blocked, because Mario Roering is using multiple accounts here. I am an honest person, I use only ONE account. If the people behind Wikipedia has any sort of decency, they would adhere to their own rules, respect for other people and remove this content in order to close the subject once and for all. If not, I assure you that it will never end. Then you will have your edit war. I am trying whatever I can to adhere to the rules, but when the other party does not.... Well, you can figure it out for yourself. Any articles reflecting only one person's opinion, should never be included in an encyclopedia, not even an electronical one. Mario Roering should instead put all such articles on his own PRIVATE site. I would of course try to close his PRIVATE site then, so perhaps that is exactly what he intends to avoid. So he exploit free resources on the Internet, including Wikipedia to continue his misconduct, defamation and lies. Anyway, thanks for deleting some of the articles so far. I look forward to reading your reply. Peter Lee 5 July 2005 22:43 (UTC)

WILL YOU NOW STOP THIS MENTALLY INSANE PERSON????

Even though you have deleted my personal userpage (thanks) Mario Roering has just recreated it with contents of his own. This guy certainly is a disgrace in all aspects and deeper meanings of the word. If THIS is not an indisputeable evidence of this guy's misconduct and defamation, then I certainly don't know what is. Mario's sole purpose here at Wikipedia is indeed misconduct and defamation as well as spreading his lies etc. NOW will you stop him?????? Peter Lee 5 July 2005 23:20 (UTC)

Sheffield Wicker Station

Hi. Do you mind if I make some changes to this page to align it with my page on the Sheffield and Rotherham Railway which I have put ready for when I get there with the North Midland Railway. History repeating itself?

There is point: the northbound connection from Sheffield was there from the beginning.

My amended text is as follows:

It was opened on 31 October1838 as the southern terminus of the Sheffield & Rotherham Railway, which ran from this station north to Rotherham Westgate Station. Curves linking the Sheffield & Rotherham to the North Midland Railway, in both directions at Rotherham Masborough Station were added in 1869.

Wicker station became obsolete as a passenger station on 1 February1870 when the Midland Railway opened a direct route from Chesterfield to just North of Wicker station, involving gradients of 1 in 100, a viaduct and three tunnels. One, the Bradway Tunnel is 2027 yards long. Railwaymen refer to it as the 'New Road' as opposed to the North Midland section as the 'Old Road'.

The new Sheffield Midland Station replaced Wicker station on this new route, which is now part of the Midland Main Line.

Antisemitism in Poland

a redirect is not a good idea - I'm for deleting --Witkacy 19:07, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

Deletion

Hello, JeremyA! Thanks for your great work in Wikipedia, and in deleting nonsense articles. Two quick questions: sometimes, when I'm tagging pages with {{d}} , an admin (like you) has already deleted the page. Thus, I inadvertantly recreate the page. Should I stop doing "New pages" RC patrol because it gives admins more work to do? Second, for pages like "Autocatalytic enzyme", which has an encyclopedic title and name, but basically no content (just the name repeated), should those be speedied, VfD, or kept? Thanks so much. Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 02:52, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

Thanks! Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 03:11, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

Well, after trying it out, I find that (for me) opening up many subwindows just gets it to be too confusing. Anyways, right now (about 4 EST) it's not so bad; there's actually a backlog at speedy deletions and some of the pages I tagged are taking longer than usual to be deleted. I guess it's an "off-peak" hour. But thinking about this I came up with an idea for the developers: block a page from being recreated for the 5 minutes after it was deleted. This would not only prevent inadvertant recreations, but would stop vandals from recreating the page immediately afterward. What do you think? Thanks a lot! Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 21:17, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

I've never used CDVF. I'm afraid I can't get it to work, and besides, I'm using public university labs right now. :-( Anyways, what I'm thinking would be helpful is that in the next update, the developers put in an automatic one-minute block on pages deleted. It is highly unlikely that a page deleted in the past minute would have a good reason for being recreated; if so, the page could be recreated after one minute. In addition, this one-minute automatic block would prevent accidental recreations by RC patrollers tagging {{delete}} and would also prevent vandals from recreating the same page. What do you think we propose this to the developers? Thanks, Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 19:14, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Inhabited Artical taken down

Copyright issues mentioned.. but this artical is on just about everyother site concerning them. As this band has just released their debut album, you should put something up on them.

Edits on Genseiryu

Hello Jeremy... You have done a good job recently, recovering the Genseiryu article from the vandalist actions by Peter Lee. Now you can see that this Peter Lee is up to a confrontation again and is trying to start another edit war as can be seen here. He is deliberately altering large parts of texts and adding wrong information (even using my full name in the article itself for deliberate defamation), knowing we will change it back to the original information that was formed to create an NPOV article and knowing this will eventually lead to a complete removal of the article and a block on it. That's exactly what he's after... (Please see also what he wrote in an email to Waerth). I've send Peter Lee a message, trying to talk some sense in him, but I already know this is absolutely useless and a complete waste of my time, since he's shown for a long time already to be a liar, fraud and vandalist. Maybe you as a moderator can do something about this? We would really appreciate your effort! Thanks! Regards, -- MarioR 22:34, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Hi there Jeremy. Now we are at it again. Sorry to disturb you. As a matter of fact, I have not read the part by Mario above, I have no time for reading anymore of his stories. But, I have just spent some time editing an article [[2]] but only 25 minutes later, I see it clearly vandalised by Mario Roering by editing some text and removing perfectly accurate links. For some reason he continues to write lies and presumptions of his own about Tosa sensei (the supreme master of Genseiryu), myself, Denmark, Holland and in general unverified issues as well as lies and diliberate inaccurate information about the organisation I am a representative of in Europe. If I am not the major sourse of correct information in regard to the organisation I represent, then who is? Mario Roering has no knowledge of it, as can clearly be seen by his edits and continuous lies and inaccurate information. I have decided to completely ignore Mario Roering, and I intend not to read anything on any talk page written by him. Neither will I post a reply. My concern is solely in regard to the accuracy of the articles about Genseiryu here at Wikipedia, and for that reason, I do not intend to engage in any discussion with that person whatsoever. Mario Roering also include a link to obvious defamatory content on his own userpage. I would kindly request of you to admonish Mario for having put these links here on Wikipedia, as they are a clear violation of Wikipedia's own rules. The removal and warnings in this regard has already been issued in the Dutch section of Wikipedia. I am sorry to bother you on such a trivial issue, but as you can see, Mario Roering and myself - though expected to solve this as adults - we cannot. So I leave it up to the sysops to decide. Thanks. Peter Lee 23:25, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Dear Jeremy, I am the third person asking you to keep protecting the article about Genseiryu. Mr.Peter Lee who's actual name is Peter Larsen doesn't want an article about Genseiryu on Wikipedia. On the dutch Wikipedia he succeeded to do this just by repeatedly deleting everything in the article written by Mario Roering. One moderator said had enough with the edit war and removed the article. To avoid this to happen again we made an article with a Neutral Point of View and give Mr. Lee the chance to write his own truth on that part and Mario on his part. We thought this is a good and fair idea. Mr. Lee doesn't like to see that people differ in opinion with him. So first he deleted evrything and now changing everything which is supposed to stay neutral to avoid an edit war. He is not the real representative in Europe but he claims that himself. He is not even a member of an official Karate Federation. Mario is trying to avoid some edit war I hope you give him some advide how to do this. Thanks in advance,--212.127.137.2 23:48, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Just saw your message on my talkpage. I see no reason why I should write a lot of papers or explanations on why Mario Roering and I disagree. I believe that is obvious from the edits on the articles. Everything you ask for can be read on both our websites. Why should I submit it to you just wasting more time on this obvious mentally insane person. As you can see on the Dutch section, Mario Roering is at it again. On Wikipedia I am the victim of multiple accusations, misconduct and slander (see Mario's last edition under false IP: 212.127.137.2) with continuous obvious defamatory contents. As I have told you and many other sysops (or whatever) here at Wikipedia, then I am the official representative of Genseiryu. Mario Roering is a student in a dojo under the W.G.K.F. in Holland. He has been a student there for less than a year. My knowledge and insight in the Genseiryu is far more advanced that his in any way you can think of, simply because of my appointment as representative and for the reason that I am a shihan having studied Genseiryu for more than 20 years and teaching for nearly 17 years now. I do not claim to know everything, but it is obvious that Mario Roering is lying and including diliberate incorrect information. And he cannot refrain himself from writing anything about me. He always write in such a way, that everything is black/white. When he writes something, he also claim that HE is the genuine Genseiryu, and we are not. Of course that is a diliberate lie, as I have proven time and time again here at Wikipedia. Read the edits, the proof is there. I am spending too much time on this obviously mentally insane person, and I see no reason why I should spent more time. I am an adult, and I find this ridiculous. Mario Roering is to blame here, and I find it obscene and morbid to sink to his level. Your message suggests exactly that. Peter Lee 14:18, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

COMMENT ON GENSEIRYU ISSUE

Forgot to include this viewpoint: I have many times talked to you and other Wikipedians about this situations. I have also made it very clear, that as long as Mario is allowed to edit and post articles here, there will be no solution to the problem. It will persist forever. The simple reason being, that Mario claim to write neutral but he certainly does not, he claim lies about me and our organisation, he has done no research whatsoever on these subjects or any other, and he has no intentions whatsoever to write anything about Genseiryu that would promote me or my organisation - not even just neutral topics. In all his articles he continue to write about us, and he proclaim himself and his organisation as being Genseiryu, and that we are not. So as I believe there is no hope at all for a change in Mario Roering's attitude, I believe all your efforts and attempts to mediate will be invane indeed. It is a waste of time. To futher my argument on this point, Mario Roering has created a great number of free resource websites on the Internet. One of 2 have been completely removed 5 times !!!! from Angelfire's servers, because they found that the information here was indeed misconduct and defamatory. Now Mario Roering has put the contents on his own personal homepage. The link to his forum with the same obvious defamatory contents still persist here at Wikipedia. THAT should say it all. It astonishes me time and time again, that Wikipedia obviously is so irresponsible on this matter, allowing Mario Roering to continue his actions without any consequenses. Because I believe Mario Roering will never ever change his attitude, I have suggested before, that any and all articles regarding Genseiryu is removed completely from Wikipedia. If this is done, all of us, including you, can return to more prifitable issues. If you will not do that, I see no solution at all, for the simple reasons expressed in this section. Peter Lee 14:35, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

I have only one remark to this and I don't even want to start commenting on the rest of his BS: just check Peter Lee's own forum... Look who's talking! -- MarioR 15:26, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Dear Mr. Lee,

What a positive contribution you are making by deleting everything. --212.127.137.2 15:28, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Use standard hyphens,not HTML commands

As noted on my talk page,this is something I feel strongly about.I am sorry if User:Susvolans has any allies in his efforts to replace standard keyboard characters with HTML commands that make editing tasks more tedious.It appears to be the Wikipedia goal to make the software interpret the keyboard dashes and render the HTML commands as a result;in the meantime,imposing the HTML is just silly.(In case you haven't noticed,I have done thousands of edits over an extended period...your note seemed to imply I was a newbie).--Louis E./le@put.com/12.144.5.2 19:26, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Curator at nl.wikipedia

Dear JeremyA, I'm since today curator at nl.wikipedia of Mario Roering and Peter Lee. As I understood You are the mediator of these two users. For more information about my curatorship, see their usertalkpages. I left there a message. I will not judge the articles themselves, but the way discussions are held at nl.wikipedia, and vandalism at nl.wikipedia. If you would like it I can be contacted about this matter at my Dutch userpage. You can reach me also via email: effeietsanders AT wikipedia DOT be . I hope I informed you enough, for more information you can contact me as well. Effeietsanders 21:17, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Why does Wikipedia (and you) continue to help Mario Roering?

Now, why are you as always helping Mario Roering? Just 3 minutes after he has edited the Genseiryu page back to include nothing but lies, you protect the page. Why not revert the page back to the version edited by me, and THEN protect the page? I have never ever seen such irresponsible behaviour any where else on the Internet. What is your function here? To help Mario? To censor me? To assist in spreading more lies? WHAT is your purpose here. I simply don't see it. Why is it always me who is blocked, why is it me, who is slandered and why is it me, who is attacked and attacked again without any consequences whatsoever to anyone doing so? Why? Can you give me any valid answer? And don't give that irresponsible answer as: "We don't care who is right or wrong, we only care about Wikipedia", because that indeed is just the manifestation of that same irresponsibility. How hard can it be to solve this problem? Obviously impossible to the people at Wikipedia. If you cannot stop that insane Mario, then warn him about writing anything whatsoever about Genseiryu Karate-do International Federation, Kunihiko Tosa sensei, his books and myself. And warn him about writing degrading text about the same as well. He cannot refrain himself from doing so, and that is the exact reason, why this dispute will NEVER be over. It is impossible for me to fathom, how this can be so hard for you Wikipedians to understand. As you can see (if you take a look of course) is that Mario Roering simply write exactly the same defamatory contents on the Dutch page, even though this has been disputed by me hundres of times now. HE does NOT want to cooperate in any way whatsoever, and he will continue to write HIS story the way he want it. And as you can see, he is using multiple IPadresses and being dishonest about his intentions even now, after having been warned multiple times by among others yourself. This certainly is NOT productive in any way whatsoever. ARE you going to do ANYTHING productive here, or are you just yet another person here at Wikipedia who keep pushing the responsibility away? Peter Lee 23:29, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Well, need I say anymore, JeremyA? I rest my case... -- MarioR 23:41, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Karate

Jeremy, would you please add karate also to your watchlist? Thanks! Lee is mutilating that one over and over again. I explained my (minor) edits on the Talk page of Karate, but he keeps reverting my edits to wrong information, adding weird and offensive notes to the summary, calling me "angry", "a vandalist" and "a liar". Just click on the links and read and see for yourself that the site www.genseiryu.jp is a Butokukai site. It says Genseiryu-Butokukai all over the place, so this is NOT a Genseiryu site like the last link (Genseiryu Karate, Honbu Dojo, Ito, Japan). The site belongs to GKIF, the organisation of sensei Tosa, which is Genseiryu-butokukai. Peter Lee has to stop pretending he is Genseiryu for he is NOT. -- MarioR 00:01, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

For your information regarding Genseiryu

I see your acknowledgement of my point of view written above. I thank you for that. I do not find your additions to the Genseiryu page entirely fair though, but I accept your acknowledgement of my view on the matter, and I shall let it be at that. On the page "Karate" I see that Mario continues to put hid comments inside the edits, in regard to some ridiculous claim, that The Genseiryu Karate-do International Federation should have been forced by LAW to only use Genseiryu in conjunction with the term Butokukai. Mario keeps writing this, and that indeed is a big lie. Which once again show the intentions of Mario. I still fail to understand why you Wikipedians still need more proof. His actions are clear. I have changed and removed the text on "Karate" in this regard. The same thing goes for the Dutch part of the article Genseiryu. Mario continues to write lies and lies about an organisation he knows nothing about. The Genseiryu Karate-do International Federation is the only recognized official organization in regard to Genseiryu in Japan. The W.G.K.F. which Mario keeps proclaiming as the only valid organisation is a NEW organisation established by a few autonome clubs in 2003. These clubs has time and time again been denied membership to the Genseiryu Karate-do International Federation. The reasons are many, but one of the reasons being, that they continue this behaviour (like Mario Roering is doing now at Wikipedia). Yes, you are right, this is not the first time I compete in such a dispute and fight. It has happened a few times before. The reason why this dispute is not solved yet must be found in the handling by among others yourself. It is your lack of meassures, that keeps this thing going. Yes, I regret to say it, but for me, that seems to be the case. Well, now you know exactly why I have once again corrected the diliberate lies and incorrect information by Mario Roering. I do not vandalise anything, I simply remove the parts, which are incorrect, and contains obvious infamatory contents. And Mario Roering is an expert in writing that kind of thing. Well, I guess we will "talk" again soon. Peter Lee 00:13, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Peter Lee is again smearing my name here, using a lot of insultive language (what a gentleman), as he has done with many other people, even people with high ranks inside Genseiryu. I can tell you that the WGKF never had and never will have the intention to become a member of GKIF. WGKF is a rather new Federation that simply combines several OLD organizations worldwide, one of them being the All Japan Genseiryu Karatedo with the Honbu Dojo in Ito, Japan. This organization is the first Genseiryu organization and the only Genseiryu organization that is allowed to use the name Genseiryu. That is to say, by JAPANESE law! Sensei Tosa was ordered by a court of law that he is not allowed to call his organization just Genseiryu but has to use the additional term Butokukai. Do you have anybody in your area that can read Japanese? I hope so, because then I can send you the proof about that! Peter Lee doesn't have any proof to prove the contrary, simply because he is lying about his organization. I still don't understand why he's having such difficulties with the additional term Butokukai. I even think it's childish to fight about something stupid like this. What's in a name??? But "soyez correct", he is NOT Genseiryu, he is Genseiryu-BUTOKUKAI, derived from Genseiryu. This can already clearly be seen in the history of Genseiryu and evidence is lying all over the place... Regards, -- MarioR 00:29, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

What are we waiting for??

I have a question for you Jeremy? What are we waiting for? How long is the protection going to be in effect, and what would it take to get it removed? The edit war continues, as you might already know. It is now in effect and very hot on the Dutch section of Genseiryu. I spent a lot of time on this ridiculous issue, but in order to protect what I have worked for for more than 20 years, well, you can figure it out. I have now talked to 8 people who will help me to edit and correct the vandalism by Mario Roering. So now him and I are even in odds. I hope to see a reply from you very soon. Thanks. Peter Lee 00:48, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Dear JeremyA, the fact that he is mutilating the Genseiryu article on the Dutch section says it all! On his user page you can read the following:

If you want to write in this page, you MUST write in English.

To which Waerth wrote:

Than you are on the wrong site we are a Dutch site you know! WâërÞ©2005|overleg 8 jul 2005 23:01 (CEST)

So it's clear that without a thorough knowledge of Dutch, he's deleting large parts of texts, this can only mean that he is again after total deletion of the article, like he was last time... Are you gonna let him win this war again? Don't fall for his so called "research" of 20 years. 20 years ago he was just a 14-year old beginner in a school called Genshi-kan who kicked him out of the school later because of dishonorable actions... Also I don't believe he has 8 people that are helping him to "edit and correct the vandalism", 'cause nobody is that stupid to not see the difference between creating a good and neutral article and totally mutilating it with the sole purpose of deletion of the whole article... -- MarioR 00:58, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

WHY have I been blocked AGAIN???

I have NOT broken ANY rules whatsoever on Wikipedia, but nevertheless, I have been blocked in the Dutch section. This has to stop. Whenever Mario Roering cannot get you or his first choices to block me, then he simply contact yet another one at Wikipedia to do this dirty work. THAT is censoring, and THAT is once again a completely irresponsible action from Wikipedia's side. Never have I seen such behaviour and support of such behaviour anywhere else on the Internet. It is this kind of activity that breaks down people's trust of the information here. I have not been given ANY reason for the block. Mario simply asked for the block, and obviously he got it. How can you guys sleep at night? This is the user who blocked me: [[3]]. Can I get an explanation, or would I once again simply be wasting my time here? Peter Lee 01:20, 15 July 2005 (UTC) Addition. As I have told you before, I intend NOT to read nor write any comments from or to Mario Roering. His stories are of such a nature, that I have simply had enough of it. I will talk or write only directly to you in this matter. Any questions or answers needed, should then be asked by you, as I have no intention whatsoever to do nothing else than ignoring Mario Roering. I will never sink to his level. I hope you may understand that?? Peter Lee 01:25, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

One of our mods gave you a block of twelve hours. That was because you had an edit-war at Genseiryu. Because of my curatorship I expanded this block to a week. I warned both of you not to start a edit-war again. You started it again (both of you, you can't have an edit-war just by yourself), so I blocked you. This does not mean that my curatorship has ended. And, by the way, other moderators have the full right to block you if they think it is nesessary. Effeietsanders 07:14, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Really??

I just saw your addition on my talkpage. Well, I understand your comments, but are you REALLY going to enforce that? I see no change in anything anywhere. Mario STILL have links to defamatory contents on his edited pages, and as you know I have been blocked from editing in the Dutch section, so unfortunately I have not been able to remove the link from his userpage this time. But I will do it of course when the block is soon lifted. But if you really mean what you said on my talk page, then I would not have to remove it right? Because YOU would have done it??!?!?!?!?!!?? I guess your intentions remains to be seen (please don't misunderstand me though, I respect in full the Wikipedia rules, what I don't accept is Mario Roering's continued defamation of the GKIF organisation and myself). Enough said for now. Peter Lee 04:08, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

I understand your posted viewpoint. And of course I can agree to any rule or policy of Wikiepedia AS LONG as these does not intervene with or allow contents that is defamatory. Wikipedia seem to be completely unable to understand the core of this dispute. The core of this dispute is about facts. Mario is not only writing his (diliberately refraining here from calling it lies) "views" on things here at Wikipedia. He uses the entire Internet to his benefit. He does simply not care about any damage done to any person, organisation or otherwise. He forces his "opinion" onto other users and persons with no regard to any facts whatsoever. Actually, I do not care the least about the World Genseiryu Karate-do Federation. They can do and write whatever they want. That federation is an autonome federation (in my view based on my research results). I simply do not care about it, exactly as I would not care about any other federation such as Shotokan, Gojo-ryu etc. in regard to Genseiryu. Without going into detail in regard to who is right or not, then my dispute with Mario is only in regard to the defamatory contents, and in regard to the form or wording used to describe the W.G.K.F. as being the "one and only". It is not, as can be seen by going to the links provided here: http://www.genseiryu.jp and the http://www.karatedo.co.jp/news/new-english/e-topnews.html (se the top-logos news of G.K.I.F.). Inside the Japan Karate-do Federation this federation (G.K.I.F.) is the only officially recognized organisation of Genseiryu. This is furthermore acknowledged (and can be revered as evidence) as the JKF has acknowledged the SANSAI kata (a form of techniques organized and trained in sequence) of our organisation as the "one and only" version. I said before, that I do not care about who is right or wrong, and who has the ligitimate right to use one word or the other. This dispute is NOT about that. The issue is about whether or not Mario Roering is allowed to post his "views" here at Wikipedia as FACTS, when they are not. For example. No law has been issued in Japan or anywhere else, stating that the G.K.I.F. has to use Genseiryu and Butokukai together. That is ridiculous to the extend of insanity. The sole reason being, that the G.K.I.F. has used, practiced, taught, published books, etc. on Genseiryu since 1953. This is the oldest organisation there is. But again, I do not care who is right or wrong, as long as Mario Roering would promise (and if Wikipedia would ENFORCE such a promise) that he would never ever write anything (at all) about anything in regard to the Genseiryu Karate-do International Federation or its members. Because every time he writes something, it has nothing to do with the facts. As I see it, Mario and I will NEVER agree to anything on this matter, thus topics of this matter should not be written by him. So if he stops this attitude, the defamatory contents would also vanish kind of automatically. Mario Roering does write tons of articles about our organisation despite the fact that he has no knowledge of it. The big difference is, that I DO have a lot of knowledge about THEIR organisation (but despite this fact, I don't write anything about their organisation). The reason for this insight, if we can call it that, is of course my research, but also because many of their members have unsuccessfully applied for membership of our organisation for years since the early 1980's. The head of their organisation in Holland, Nobuaki Konno, tried for more than ten years to qualify for membership, but finally in 1996 all relations to him ended abrubtly. Despite this fact, Konno's last attempt on becoming a member was personally handed to me in a cealed envelope by Konno in an airport in Holland. I took this letter to the supreme master of Genseiryu in Japan - the head of the Genseiryu Karate-do International Federation, Kunihiko Tosa. The application was once again denied. This all happened in November 2001. As I am the official representative, Konno send his application through me. Another reason would be, that the W.G.K.F. organisation is very new, and thus easy to follow as the information becomes available. Our organisation also include a few members that once had a high position inside their organisation. By simply considering the great number of sources as a basis for "my" knowledge in contrast to the sources of Mario, should simply be enough to support my arguments here. Anyway, I will submit to any rule at Wikipedia of course, but I will not submit to any kind of "court-like" ruling. The reason is simple. Wikipedia has no authority in Genseiryu, and as such (also in regard to having no knowledge of anything in this regard as mentioned by yourself and others) cannot settle this disagreement or dispute. So, I will submit to cooperation in making ONE article about Genseiryu (not 5 or 6 as is the case with articles spread all over). The article can then be put here for the benefit of all, but I will NOT submit to any court-like ruling on the matter of Genseiryu in regard to facts. I find this "condition" or should I say viewpoint of mine very fair indeed under the circumstances. And, thanks for the "addendum", I understand the block then. Peter Lee 05:46, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Now for no reason at all, I have been blocked for a week at the Dutch site. Well, Mario has suffered the same, so I guess it is "alright". BUT I would request of you to please make sure that the link to his so-called honest forum is removed. This is a link to a site with defamatory contents in the same regard as earlier. He had two links there, and the one has been removed, as well as he has been warned to never put it back on. But one link still remains. Would you please do that, as I can now not edit anything myself in the Dutch section. If you cannot either, then please contact someone who can. Thanks. The curator seems to punish people without reason, simply helping Mario, as his defamatory links are still there..... Well, I hope he can sleep at night. Peter Lee 06:57, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Why do you say something but never enforces it?

You told me, that you would not allow any kinds of defamatory contents nor links to such issues, but how is it then, that Mario Roering is allowed to host these things without any consequences? I once again urge to make sure these things are deleted from his or any other article here. I have removed these links, but they keep popping up. If you and Wikipedia are to keep my faith in you and the articles here, then you should of course stand by your own words. So far I see nothing of the sort. It is a disgrace, the way Mario Roering is continuously helped by sysops (or whatever) at Wikipedia. Peter Lee 14:14, 15 July 2005 (UTC)