binksternet hello enric i just had a very brief discussion with which went as follows me binksternet user kitsunedawn has inserted a new section into amelia earhart which is redundant to the paragraph on gardner island the new section also seems to have a bit of a wp pov issue i d rectify the situation myself but the page is protected i understand you have some history with the article so i thought you might want to know about it binksternet the added material is far too promotional for tighar i would like to ask why you the ip editor from northern mississippi did not remove the text yourself it is plainly counter to the nominal purpose of putting forward the best available information about earhart nevertheless i am happy to do so despite the fact that you did not do so after i finished laughing i started to write a reply but i realized that if binksternet could not be bothered to read as far as the third sentence of my first post then there was no reason to think that he would actually read my reply i also think that his mention of my geographic location is purposeless i am well aware of my own location this is not the first time that binksternet has started shit with me back in november i had this thoroughly unpleasant conversation with binksternet when i tried to correct a problem with grey school of wizardry binksternet indicates in a picture on his talk page that he thinks that registration should be required and while he is entitled to his own opinion he isn t entitled to cast utterly baseless aspersions of impropriety at ip editors the last time i wanted to fix a problem with the earhart article i asked dougweller to do it and he was agreeable i see now that i should have brought this recent problem to the attention of an administrator but i had thought it would be helpful to alert binksternet to the issue because he has a history with the article and would be more likely to keep an eye on the situation than an admin who doesn t normally edit the article would you please explain to binksternet that i can t edit the article because it is protected and i have already explained that in my first post it isn t civil to baselessly accuse ip editors of wrongdoing when they are trying to improve wikipedia and operating in good faith ip editors are allowed to edit wikipedia thanks