I'm being harrassed by an annoymous user who is putting out alerts through your system in order to attact some fellow harrassers.  Its an on going campaign.  There was no good reason for censoring my link to an article I wrote on the Catiline conspiracy.  And that I don't own my contributions here is of course completely false.  You must think wikipedia owns them, since either you own them or I own them (law of excluded middle)

But I will resist using logic because it doesn't seem to be a strong point for you publication.  It should at some point occur to you that an anonymous user has demanded that anonymous contributions be prohibited to the Catiline article.  On the other hand, my yname is plastered all over denouncing me as "disruptive" and "blocked" while nothing is said of whoever it was who gave out my personal info.  And whereas I was anonymous, I must wonder how it is that they know "E. H. Campbell" was using a UMT IP.  These peole have threatened to murder me in the past, now because of your "Privacy Policy", which evidently signifies that I may be publically attacked by anonymous users, has breached my personal security.  I am not pleased.

E. H. Campbell, Inopibus Press: Seattle
http://inopibuspressseattle.blogspot.com
inopibus@gmail.com   

If you have been threatened, then you should take it up with law enforcement.  As to your identity, you have yourself associated Inopibus with your name; it did not take much deduction to link that with the IP edits when you weren't logged in.

Wikipedia does not own the content posted here (with the exception of some small elements such as logos and trademarks which the Wikimedia Foundation owns) but the terms of use state that by posting anything here you own, you are granting an irrevocable license.  (T:C) 

"You claim that this IP address is "outing" you; but you have repeatedly claimed to be this person on this very talk page."

I have not repeatedly or ever claimed to be this person.  

If you have been threatened, then you should take it up with law enforcement.  As to your identity, you have yourself associated Inopibus with your name; it did not take much deduction to link that with the IP edits when you weren't logged in.

Its not really a question as to whether or not one could deduce who was behind this IP it is a question as to WHY? anyone should feel the need to publish what amounts to an altert that I was editing Catiline followed by instant undo's with remarks like "rm link spam" "unexpalined rv Edward Campbell aka .... aka..."  By what appears to be a single use account which hit my page moments before making unfounded accusations.  

This link is not spam: http://www.indybay.org/uploads/2007/11/03/discontents3nov07.pdf Its a very well researched document.  Which has not been refuted by your "editors."   Wikipedia has a problem with who writes not with what was written.  For instance calling Catiline a "criminal" was called "laughably POV"  but wikipedia assers Charels manson was "is a career criminal" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Manson  In the last analysis whoever is responsible for the Catiline wiki has done a very poor job and is calling "disruptive" very logical arguments with well substantiated research.  But what they really mean by disruptive is the collapse of their very weak theories.  Obviously their minds were thrown into chaos when their theory came crashing down.  But if wiki is also a hideout for organized harassment, I should distance my self from that.