FT2 back in the ArbCom race, with lots to say about the happenings of 2008 Options

[Alison]

Heyyaz,

Looks like FT2 has put his name forward again. And he's got quite a lot of interesting things to say, including more on PoetHorde, certain alternate accounts and more on stuff that happened behind the scenes back in 2008.

Edit: And including about those 'oversighted edits' and the OrangeMarlin affair.

[Peter Damian]

Well we finally have an explanation of the TBP account from FT2. FT2 drafted the article on Hani Miletski, emailed it to TBP, who then posted it. That is why FT2 claimed the article as his own.

Thank you for the response. Could you say what you meant when you said you had written those articles from scratch? Looking at Hani Miletski, the current article doesn't differ much from the one started and written by TBP. SlimVirgin talk|contribs 05:57, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

After more than 4 years, specific details about this article or stub and how it was created or co-edited across email and wiki (and maybe other means, can't remember for sure but we never did voice and I probably wasn't on irc) are completely unmemorable. With the caveat that it's a guess, from the page history I would have copyedited a draft short article or long stub, he would have discussed it or maybe just said nothing and used it, then either added other stuff as I fielded email questions or did extra research after sending the first draft and sent extra emails, and such. That makes most sense. The history suggests he got a draft (or a rewrite of his draft or notes, there could have been prior email dialog) from me, then a bunch of extra copyedit suggestions filtering through one at a time in the space of 30 minutes, suggesting I was still looking up or reviewing stuff, then there's a 50 minute pause, then I added a few others. I think what that means is, after sending him a written or copyedited version he posted it on-wiki (with or without some edits), I then emailed him copyedits or extra information (there wasn't time for much discussion judging by the timing in history). After that he probably went offline or I did. I probably came back, re-read it and found more improvements and posted them myself. On collating examples of content work I'd done for RFA, I listed it as an example of a page effectively written from scratch, suggesting it was more likely my draft or a draft based on notes rather than a copyedit. But I emphasize that's a guess, I'm interpreting a very old page history based on impressions and how it apparently went. FT2 (Talk | email) 08:04, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

[CharlotteWebb]

lol, wikipedia is where anyone can wander in off the internet and make up some plausible sounding user name

Mangaard would have been plausible as a (reasonably common) Scandihoovian surname, but Manguard is right out.

Moreover any candidate with more user-talk edits than article edits should be disqualified summarily.

Well we finally have an explanation of the TBP account from FT2. FT2 drafted the article on Hani Miletski, emailed it to TBP, who then posted it. That is why FT2 claimed the article as his own.

Thank you for the response. Could you say what you meant when you said you had written those articles from scratch? Looking at Hani Miletski, the current article doesn't differ much from the one started and written by TBP. SlimVirgin talk|contribs 05:57, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

After more than 4 years, specific details about this article or stub and how it was created or co-edited across email and wiki (and maybe other means, can't remember for sure but we never did voice and I probably wasn't on irc) are completely unmemorable. With the caveat that it's a guess, from the page history I would have copyedited a draft short article or long stub, he would have discussed it or maybe just said nothing and used it, then either added other stuff as I fielded email questions or did extra research after sending the first draft and sent extra emails, and such. That makes most sense. The history suggests he got a draft (or a rewrite of his draft or notes, there could have been prior email dialog) from me, then a bunch of extra copyedit suggestions filtering through one at a time in the space of 30 minutes, suggesting I was still looking up or reviewing stuff, then there's a 50 minute pause, then I added a few others. I think what that means is, after sending him a written or copyedited version he posted it on-wiki (with or without some edits), I then emailed him copyedits or extra information (there wasn't time for much discussion judging by the timing in history). After that he probably went offline or I did. I probably came back, re-read it and found more improvements and posted them myself. On collating examples of content work I'd done for RFA, I listed it as an example of a page effectively written from scratch, suggesting it was more likely my draft or a draft based on notes rather than a copyedit. But I emphasize that's a guess, I'm interpreting a very old page history based on impressions and how it apparently went. FT2 (Talk | email) 08:04, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Except, this "explanation" is bull to the power of shit, and everyone knows it.

[Peter Damian]

Except, this "explanation" is bull to the power of shit, and everyone knows it.

No I think most people accept it.