UserSlrubenstein and others falsifying and defamatory edits    who obviously does not like the word theory and didnt like the article from the beginning has repeatedly edited the article adding falsifying terms like proposal instead Nowhere does Carotta propose or claim anything Already in the Introit of his book Jesus was Caesar it is clearly stated that To anticipate the result Jesus proves to be Divus Iulius the deified Caesar passed down in tradition The word he uses for this finding is disclosure So it is wrong to write he proposes or claims Theory was therefore the best compromise but the respectable  and other distorters dont like that It should be noted here that  has not bothered to explain and discuss on this talk page why he egomaniacally altered the status quo and threatened other users who maintained theory with blockage which was later carried out He has not answered the questions raised by someone above concerning his problems with this article either  Now this excellent  has even gone so far as to protect ie block prevent editing the article altogether I think everyone involved in this or just reading here should seriously ask themselves whether  who canvassed against the article voted for stong delete and most emphatically defamed the author as crackpot this might be actionable is the right person to further work on this article let alone be an admin in control of it   who also voted for strong delete and who has already been convicted of lying and destorting scholarly statements above now thinks he is the appropriate authority to judge on Carottas undeniable and never before denied classical scholarship He obviously knows better than reputable scholars like Piero Canfora Kavoukopoulos Simon and others Heres your typical Wikipedia editor  Nothing new can be said of  either He helps wherever he can to degrade the article and defame its subject   is not even capable or is he not willing to correctly translate the word Wissenschaftsparodie into English The correct translation is science parody Another typical WP editor it seems  I dont even want to talk about  Some quotes from the Gospel come to mind   The long and short of all this is Extremely biased and unjust editors like those mentioned above who with the exception of  who meanwhile says he almost regrets his vote voted for strong delete of the article should abstain from editing the article first and foremost the notorious  To confer administrator power over the article to him must be one of the worst jokes I have ever seen even on Wikipedia But there seems to be no limit as to how low this socalled Free encyclopedia can go