Evidence from RfC reprinted Evidence of disputed behavior Incivility and personal attacks Don t do that again it s utterly disgusting and sneaky Quite beyond belief I m utterly disgusted at these shenanigans I ll take this as a blatantly bad faith deletion This was pure bloodlust Egregious edit warring damaging the wiki the morale of all editors and the reputation of all Wikipedia administrators It is idiocy like this that truly disgusts me Utterly ludicrous deletion Despite the false claims made elsewhere Responding badly to criticism Your criticism was not only intemperate it was completely misplaced in response to an apology by another user Stop making patently false claims about my opinion This was patronising offensive and of course completely useless advice since I d done nothing of the sort I found your comments completely unacceptable It seems like sadism for the sake of it Don t breach good faith repeatedly and then try to lecture someone else to do what you already are signally failing to do A succession of often quite breathtaking bits of illogic and marshalling citations to edits that don t say at all what he claims they say Stating there are no problems My only claim to acting in this way is that I can get away with doing so because I m good at it I ve got some very longstanding and strong differences of opinion with some other editors and I ve found ways to resolve them in a way that prevents friction on the wiki WP IAR is certainly something that requires extreme arrogance and can sometimes lead to censure I ve no problem with that Lecturing other people on behavior but not heeding his own advice WP CIV WP FAITH and WP NPA are not optional or advisory they re policies which you re expected to follow You don t like to see someone saying negative things and you take them as personal attacks This I m right you re wrong stuff has no place on Wikipedia We should all make a habit of checking our perceptions in case they should happen to be incorrect