thanks for helping to lift the veil on verbal more questions elonka i understand that verbal did not block me but is it true that he had nothing to do with it i am normally much more than civil i have often been complemented on my diplomacy and tact but this user's approach to editing seems overly aggressive and not helpful enough it seems to me that verbal is abusing his position let me give a simple example there were many edits made to the page in question with much valid data verbal simply deleted them with the cryptic note about them being non notable nn or rs or similar this does nothing to help those who were attempting to improve the page there is a term for this kind of bullying when one in the know smacks down new users without giving appropriate guidance on the page in question there were dozens of books listed with isbn numbers is that not verifiable enough if that is inappropriate what is the 'proper' way to cite books at the very least his reverts are ham handed and trashed many valid and verifiable items along with a few that were unverified how is that helpful verbal's standard seems to be if the reference includes a link to another existing wikipedia page then it is acceptable some of those pages are not sufficiently verifiable themselves given verbal's aggressive approach why not delete those other pages for lack of verifiability as well i appreciate your guidance and assistance i will do my best to bring the deleted content up to the standards once i understand them and once i have a contact like yourself to help keep an eye on verbal who refused to respond to my previous inquiries i will use my logged in credentials when i feel i am safe from being abused by verbal's overly aggressive approach i do not want to lose my account he refuses to help or answer valid questions he simply deletes entries with terse edit summaries he's not helpful in teaching newer users what he is seeking that's not what i understood was the helpful nature of the wikipedia community look at all the credentials on his page it's quite clear that he's an ego maniac the more credentials the lower the self esteem imo i question whether all of those credentials are even valid are they subject to any verification process would there be any censure if he were found to be overstating his resume thanks for letting me vent i just believe in being clear in communicating and in helping people to learn to be better wikipedia contributors