Talk:Javier Solana/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

User:Cumbey comments

The text on the page cited was copied from Wikipedia and not vice versa. It is verbatim what I personally composed and posted to Wikipedia's Free Encyclopedia based on my personal long-term research of the subject. Several encyclopedias picked up word for word what was posted originally by me on Wikipedia. The History Channel's was one of them! Constance E. Cumbey.

INTERESTINGLY, there is a category on this page called "1946 births." As a woman, it would please me to have years deducted from my life; however, Javier Solana was, per his biographical information contained on his own curriculum vitae, born in 1942. Hence, his category should be "1942 births." CEC

6-16-04: Interestingly and inexplicably, google has omitted this article which was number 3 in its ranked listings on Solana. This took place Friday. It was back up for a few hours Friday afternoon and since then has been conspicuous by its absence. Could it have been removed because the information contained therein was inconvenient and even embarrassing to Euroskeptics. It is still up on the Yahoo search engine which yields nearly twice the results as google for total entries on Javier Solana. This removal conveniently appeared to coincide with the EU MEP elections in which the Euroskeptics showed unforeseen gains. What is the story? The felony here is compounded because Google.com is also the official search engine for Wikipedia itself -- henceforth, those seeking significant and accurate information on Javier Solana are deprived of a most useful resource! CEC

February 8, 2005: Another editor for whatever reason keeps reverting this page to one containing hideous inaccuracies. He likes to write that Solana's CFSP position was created by Western European Union Assembly Recommendation 666. Assembly Recommendation 666 exists and it is truly startling in and of itself as a document.[1] However, it is clearly dated June 5, 2000. Javier Solana left NATO to take his CFSP post in October 1999. He was given control of the WEU on November 20, 1999. WEU Assembly Recommendation 666 which proposed giving the "High Representative" emergency police powers and power to convene the Council of the European Union in the event of an emergency was not adopted as EU law until the Nice conference of December 2000. Therefore, it is utterly impossible that Solana's CFSP position which he held since October 1999 was created by the Year 2000 WEU bill/Recommendation. I do not know what the motives of that poster are. I suspected good intentions, but bad information. Solana's job was, interestingly enough, created by the EU's Council of Vienna in December 1998, approximately 10 months before Solana left NATO to take the newly created post as its first holder. That position was also interestingly numbered "666."[2] It is shown by clicking on the footnote by the referenced information and the original EUROPA Section 666 document will show. The document to which our mistaken editor refers is found at [3] For those of you who are getting confused, I hope this helps. CECby me on Wikipedia. The History Encyclopedia was one of them! CEC

February 19,2005: Interesting again that the page is down from google's search site, when it was number 2 in ranking among all 650,000 google references on subject. Maybe google is reindexing, maybe the mysterious editor who kept intercepting with his own opinions so far removed from the Wikipedia policy of neutral point of view as to destroy its credibility; maybe the EU has pressured it down as President Bush is meeting and Javier Solana likes to play the role of both USA antagonist and protagonist -- a tricky job to do both right! This should be very interesting to watch!

February 26, 2005: Today there are 707,000 internet hits on Google's site on Javier Solana, with its second ranked article -- this one -- again missing. It is up on Yahoo. What, if anything are the dynamics here? Is google reindexing again? But there have been no changes? Most interesting!

Inaccurate editing and editorial comments do nobody a service!

Again, more mischief. Editorial comments are not needed in the copy. The content and supporting documen tation will speak for itself. CEC

FYI

== FOR EVERYBODY'S INFORMATION -- THE FOLLOWING ARE NOT AND NEVER WERE CONSTANCE CUMBEY'S COMMENTS! THIS IS an anonymous user (not SqueakBox, as the record shows)

The entire copy of the Javier Solana article has been added to the Number of the Beast (numerology) article. Because subtlety is not the hallmark of whoever is doing this. My money is on "bitter ex-girlfriend", but "big big fan of The Da Vinci Code" would not surprise me either.

This is from User:RickK

Re: "666" edits

You have done a lot of Bible study and research. However, Wikipedia has a policy of No Original Research, please read that page to understand why. It's an encyclopedia, not a scholarly journal or a forum for publishing essays.

Another Wikipedia policy is Neutral Point of View. Suggesting links between Solana and the Antichrist is not a mainstream point of view, and is in fact highly controversial. So it's not really in conformance with the neutral point-of-view policy and is removed from the article when added. -- 17:35, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

POV

This is far and away the most POV major article I have read on Wikipedia, with a very anti-Solana stance, and a subtle anti EU stance. The author(s) main objective seems to be to show how much power Solana is accumulating. I am not sure where to begin but this article needs a major clean up, and in the mean time I am putting a neutrality notice on it. --SqueakBox 01:29, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC) I won't do any more editing tonight; the assuming Solana was going to get new powers was the worst of it, but here is more of what I see as POV.

Despite his activity in world politics, most Americans are unfamiliar with Solana's name, the Barcelona Process, and certainly the extent of his growing powers which are becoming increasingly global in scope and influence. is encouraging Americans to get paranoid about Solana, and about the EU.

In November 2004, Solana assisted Britain, France, and Germany in negotiating a nuclear material enrichment freeze with the leadership of Iran. The EU through Solana stated it hoped to avoid another American-Iraqi style invasion through this and future negotiations. Reuters (http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsPackageArticle.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=617235&section=news) Others, particularly in the USA and England were more cynical about the motives. Rather than believe them altruistic, some British observers starting in the late 1990s stated that perhaps the EU's motives, engineered through Solana, were to dislodge the USA as a competing superpower in the coming 21st century struggle for increasingly scarce global resources. They pointed to the EU's own military buildup under the auspices of "peacekeeping" as perhaps a cover for planned future anti-USA efforts. The first 2 sentences are okay but followed by a very one sided report that does not begin to reflect the complexities of the situation. Were these British observers anti-EU? Sounds like it, in which case it needs to be stated. This paragraph seems to demonstrate the paranoia of it's author that the EU may become another world power. At the very least the opposing argument to this one needs putting to ensure a balanced appraisal. All this pure speculation about future anti-US efforts is paranioa and speculation and very pro-US interests. The link is dead as well.

Increasingly as of 2004, there is increased reliance on Javier Solana on the part of the EU and the WEU, which has noticeably strengthened his military and foreign power. On June 29, 2004 Javier Solana was selected by the Council of the European Union to be its first Foreign Minister under the new EU constitution. Until formal ratification of the constitution occurs (slated for 2006), Solana is de facto exercising the defined powers of that future office as well as its approximate 26 billion euros budget (formerly reserved for the Commissioner of External Affairs). This paragraph continually stresses his new greater powers, making him out to be a despot. Not POV.

This was dramatically illustrated by events in Israel on or about July 20 to 22nd (2004). Israel's Prime Minister Ariel Sharon declined to meet with Solana, saying that because of an EU vote against Israel at the UN that Israel would not work with the EU, notwithstanding despite its prominence on the Quartet for Peace in the Middle East. Solana stunned the world, Israel included, by replying that like it or not, both he and the EU were there to stay on the Israeli-Palestinian decision making processes. The author uses Solana's peace initiative in the Middle east to demonstrate Solana's great powers, not as an event in itself. By doing so this paragraph does also demonstrate a pro-Israel bias.

The apparent and even obvious purpose is to continue to control as much as possible EU foreign policy after the new constitution takes final effect. If Solana is to truly become the one voice speaking for Europe as he desires and plans for his full seat of Euro-power as the new EU Foreign Minister, as he projected he planned to do in a a more recent Der Spiegel article [11] (http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/spiegel/0,1518,324799,00.html), realistically he would first have to find a way to curtail these EU governments and their present leaders' ambitions to properly fit his foreign policy agenda. Some observers note that this would entail a necessary and even potentially ugly power struggle if he is to assume the powers projected for the upcoming post. In doing so, some say that if he is successful in throwing off this potential trio of resistance then some say that almost in biblical terms he might be said to have "subdued" (i.e., won power struggles) against three of the ten countries projected to have weighted power in the forthcoming European Union under its new constitution, assuming the new already signed European Union constitution is timely ratified. Solana is obviously aware of these potential conflicts. He has of late publicly downplayed the potential powers of the office saying that even under the new constitution and the new Foreign Minister with all its projected powers, that such can only be exercised if there is complete unanimity among EU participants.This continue the theme of Solana the power hungry, and takes no account of the political process behind any desire to have a common voice within the EU. You could say Solana wants a United States of Europe, but there are many within the EU who want this. These issues go much deeper than the supposed political ambitions of one man.

I will edit out these POV statements, but first, given how controversial this article has been in terms of edit wars, I am giving a bit of space for people to address my concerns. What most concerns me is the anti-EU bias to this article, which is not acceptable in Wikipedia. Though it also seems to feed into the delusional paranoia of whoever wants to associate Solana with the number of the beast, etc, which is a much more extreme form of anti-EU politicking.--SqueakBox 01:29, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)

THIS WAS FROM VIRGINIA

The facts are the facts. If Solana (and his friends) don't want people to make anything of 666, he should stop numbering his bills and resolutions with it. As I see it, the major editors are not 'anti-EU' or even 'anti-Solana.' They are, however, justifiably anti Democratic deficit -- something acknowledged to clearly exist with present proposed EU structures. There's always reform and repentance. Because the facts prove embarrassing doesn't mean people don't deserve to know them. Propaganda is that which falsely manipulates and conceals facts -- not that which truly reveals them.

User SqueakBox

Well thanks for that. Gives me a better idea of what is going on, and makes me more certain that this article needs tidying up from an NPOV viewpoint. Whether or not the EU structure is democratic is so much bigger an issue than Javier Solana, but can be addressed in the article in a balanced way. You could try creating an article Javier Solana as the Beast (minority religious belief) and see how you get on with that. BTW, some Rastafarians claim that Queen Elizabeth II is the Whore of Babylon, appropriate to be put in Rastafarianism and Whore of Babylon articles but inappropriate in the Queen Elisabeth II article. Equally it is not appropriate to have beast beliefs in the Solana article, let alone dominating it. Why not open an account and sign your articles? --SqueakBox 02:53, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)

I have now put a sentence in Number of the Beast (numerology), alongside Ronald Reagan as someone whom some people believe is the Beast. I think that is quite adequate treatment of the subject for Wikipedia. --SqueakBox 02:53, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)

THE FOLLOWING IS FROM CUMBEY

RESPONSE TO POV EDITOR

Part of your points are very good, part are presumptuous. You won't break this particular editor's heart if the paragraph on "subdued" is removed -- it was finally compromise language to pacify another person who kept editing it to that extent in a far more extreme way. My point is that if Solana (and or his bill drafting committee, having once worked for a legislature, I know about those things) doesn't want people to comment about the obvious, don't use something so inflammatory and obvious as numbering enabling legislation "666" and using Tower of Babel illustrations to depict "Europe - many tongues, one voice." At least you accused these editors of "being subtle." What was written about was hardly subtle. In so many ways the article is kind and sympathetic to its subject. His distinguished lineage is well shown. The academic contributions of his family are well portrayed. Is it disputed that most Americans don't know his name? I think not? What difference does it make whether or not Americans want or don't want a United States of Europe? It's obviously happening. But should we say nothing about it because reporting the obvious might turn people against it? At least American founding fathers respected the value of a free press!

User SqueakBox

I will do my best to respond to the latest anonymous offering. It makes a big difference to Europeans whether there is a USE or not. It is the rant about his growing powers that needs getting rid of, here and wherever it is found in the article. By mixing your comments with Beast beliefs you are not encouraging me to not go ahead and edit the article to bring it to an NPOV. I think wikipedia gives a great deal of freedom to anyone who can type and afford access to the internet. I don't know anything about the American founding fathers. What has that got to do with Javier Solana?

In my opinion the only modern (almost 30 years dead) politician who deserves treatment as a religious symbol is Haile Selassie. His alleged divinity is well treated in his article, but always from a neutral point of view. The article is not even remotely obsessed with trying to prove Selassie was God. And as I stated here Selassie deserves treatment as a religious symbol because the majority of people have now heard of him in this way. Plus Selassie's life does not touch on sensitive current political issues. Solana's does. The belief that he is the Beast is a minority belief, and most people do not associate him in this way. Europe has been one of the most sensitive UK issues since we joined in 1973. Please keep in mind this is not an American centred encyclopedia, nor Christian centred. I think you are failing to understand what neutral point of view is. All the issues of Solana's political life need to be kept in balance. We cannot just say he was distinguished and well educated but now he is a power mad despot. That is not neutral point of view.

If you could only spend 30 seconds signing in; you don't have to give your name or any personal info; just make up a name and put in a password. This would make it so much easier for everyone else. It would also mean you would be the same person when you use various different computers, which would be great, and much appreciated. Then you could sign your letters by using 4 of these squiggles~. SqueakBox 05:02, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)

THIS IS CUMBEY

Dear 'Squeak Box' Religious symbol? You said it, not me. I only pointed to religious symbolism well enough know for you yourself to point to another Wikipedia article on the very same topic. Haile Selassie as a religious symbol? As I understood him, he was a great and good man who lamented others treating him as a deity. Maybe as a former(?) Rastafarian, you have a different take. You seem to be attaching much more religious symbolism to the article than me -- I am only stating that there are things put in others faces that clearly to any knowing religious symbologist would have inflammatory effect. I think that between the two of us, I am probably the more neutral -- you have the non-neutral point of view and are busy trying to project it on this for the mostly fairly written article because of your own non-neutral point of view. You would almost think we stepped on a great religious figure revered by you in the form of Javier Solana. If that was the case, I profoundly apologize for blasphemy of the next world deity after Haile Selassie who didn't (from what I was told) relish the idolatrous attention. Can't say what Javier Solana would think! Risk my identity at this point? -- I may be dumb, but I'm not stupid!

User SqueakBox

Firstly I am not Rastafarian and do not believe Haile Selassie is God, or in the Bible, whereas you seem to believe that Solana is the Beast. Am I right? I do have a point of view around Europe and it's relations with the US, but that is not what I want to put in the article. I certainly do not think Solana is a religious figure, nor have I said so here. I thought it was you who thought that, only a maleficient one. I also speak Spanish and like Spain, so feel it is entirely appropriate to rescue this article and give it what wikipedia feels is a neutral point of view, and fitting that definition of neutral point of view into what the owner of this encyclopedia, Jimbo Wales, considers a neutral point of view. At the end of the day we all work for him.

BTW to get Solana considered by wikipedia as a symbol for the beast in this article you would not have to prove that Solana was the Beast (that kind of original research has no place even in the talk page of wikipedia). What you would have to do is prove that a great many people associated him in that way, something very different. Even then the article would still have to come from a neutral point of view. Wikipedia cannot promote the idea of Solana being the Beast as the truth, even were it to be so. Comprende?--SqueakBox

Of course if you could cite sources confirming that Solana suffers from the delusion that he is the Beast it would again be appropriate to include such info in a balanced way}.. --SqueakBox 05:50, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)

THIS IS CUMBEY

Well, I see you edited the discussion to your advantage -- omitting words -- who is promoting a religious interpretation? You, Squeakbox, clearly are. What you are reading into plain FACTS is your own fear of how people will interpret them. And by the way, I did take the trouble to go to your own page. You do per a page attributed to you, have a background of at least familiarity with Rastafarianism. That's ok by me, but if I am literate enough in religious symbolism to realize what fears somebody/committee/EU whoever generates by deliberately selecting 666 as the launching numbers for their man, why should you have a problem with that and attribute paranoia to those reporting it rather than those using it in the faces of those fearing it. You said this must be the beast. Logically stating that Solana has certain powers -- common foreign AND security policy -- a new foreign minister position that clearly upon reading (have you, Squeakbox, read it -- I have) runs all EU military functions through the Foreign Minister; that Solana requested confirmation for the FM position before the new EU constitution's ratification was a certainty -- these are FACTS. Do you want a footnote and connecting link by every sentence? I can certainly supply the links, but that might spoil the readability. I'm certain most Wikipedia users know how to run their own google/yahoo! searches to ascertain if they are being given truth or fiction and furthermore, they have the power to edit, start other articles. All a good thing -- all Wikipedia was designed to do. You don't live in Europe -- why are you so protective of Solana? Why are you reading into this article more than is there? Do you know something the rest of us perhaps need to know? Maybe you could write more about his expanding powers than me, but plainly read, on the face of what has been set forth in hundreds of thousands of internet sites, Solana (and/or his successors in office) have these EXPANDED POWERS. Does that in and of itself make the holder a despot? No, but if the potential powers are used without restraint (as many unfortunately in the USA are seeing with the present Bush administration), it doesn't matter if the original office is created for St. Francis of Assisi or Mother Teresa -- at the end the day,the power is available for use by a despot. Solana himself has acknowledged a European democratic deficit -- why do you so desperately want to halt public knowledge of same? I have saved this text in a separate document in the event that my words get chopped as in the above paragraphs and reduced to meaningless drivel. I know how to blog the internet and be assured, it will get out -- better for the sake of Wikipedia which we know and love and to which I have personally financially contributed on several occasions than to air our dirty laundry elsewhere! (Anonymous, but not always!)

User SqueakBox

I do not want to engage in this debate any more, because in my perception you are waffling, and I don't understand most of it. You are already walking a fine line with this one. I have not touched anything you wrote. Do not assume my opinions on anything, and be very careful not to engage in personal attacks against me, as they will not be tolerated. Except to say that of course I am European, and the fact I don't live there is irreleveant. Go write a blog, where you can promote any points of view you like, and promote your own agenda, but keep any lousy edits out of Wikipedia.--SqueakBox 14:23, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)

BTW the history section records every version of this and every other article and talk page, so no need to save the text. Wikipedia does it for you. --SqueakBox 18:17, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)

SqueakBox edits

I have tidied up the opening. Removed one powerful and toned down other most powerful in the opening statement, contuing to enlarge his role has been removed, as has the unnecessary those serving under him. Talk about POV obsessed with his supposed megalomania. This is not acceptable. --SqueakBox 15:41, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)

Education, Early Career, and Associations

sole and unique powers reduced to powers; sole power changed to the authority, a much more neutral term; third solely removed in thios paragraph, though it is still clear Solana had sole powers. More obsession, trying to make a point by sheer repetition.

Despite his activity in world politics, most Americans are unfamiliar with Solana's name, the Barcelona Process, and certainly the extent of his growing powers which are becoming increasingly global in scope and influence removed. It is not relevant that Americans are unfamiliar with Solana. Hondurans are unfamiliar with him as well, another fact which does not deserve mention. The rant about his growing powers is removed as POV.--SqueakBox 16:36, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)

Roles in the EU and the Western European Union

3/11 is American, while the world may know of 9/11, this is not the case for 3/11. Ultimately as unnecessary POV.

Others, particularly in the USA and England were more cynical about the motives. Rather than believe them altruistic, removed, starting in the late 1990s removed as waffle; engineered through Solana, removed as unproven POV; a competing superpower removed in reference to the USA as it is generally considered that since tghe collapse of the Soviet Union that there is only one superpower in the world;They pointed to the EU's own military buildup under the auspices of "peacekeeping" as perhaps a cover for planned future anti-USA efforts you will have to source this and then justify it's conclusion if you want it put back in, to me it is blatant pro US anti EU propaganda that should have no place in an article on Javier Solana. --SqueakBox 17:03, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)

Soplania

sarcastically and after its claimed architect removed as unnecessary; They point out that Solana has obviously done by a combination of borrowed NATO military power and diplomacy what some historians say Hitler failed to do: reduce the Balkans. removed as the most offensive statement in the article; extreme POV. Whatever your POV you have no right to compare Solana with Hitler here. This is really off! Solana has not murdered 20 million people, including 6 million in concentratiion camps; Some view this with apprehension in view of Jacques Santers' stated aims and recent calls by France to dislodge the United States as a competing superpower. removed as unnecessary POV.--SqueakBox 17:11, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)

Future

Increasingly is repeated and continues the rant; which has noticeably strengthened his military and foreign power removed as more rant; A sign of that is that is evidence of the thesis of megalomania of the author; This was dramatically illustrated by events In Israel is more of the same thesis; They have said that three countries presently stand in the way of controlling the Foreign Minister seat as he says is necessary to have one effective voice speak for Europe. The three countries that presently appear to be taking preventive measures to block him are Germany, France, and the United Kingdom. While they have been and continue to be from time to time enthusiastic Solana supporters, it appears they are aligning to form a type of an "EU directorate." removed as minority opinion not worth having, especially without balancing opinions; The apparent and even obvious purpose is to continue to control as much as possible EU foreign policy after the new constitution takes final effect. removed as blatant POV; According to an article appearing in BBC News[4] although Britain's Tony Blair, France's Jacques Chirac; and Germany's Gerhard Schroeder had made unconvincing denials of an attempted EU power grab, that they were evidently trying to do just that removed as not making sense, and was a part of the author's POV thesis explanation; If Solana is to truly become the one voice speaking for Europe as he desires and plans for his full seat of Euro-power as the new EU Foreign Minister, as he projected he planned to do in a a more recent Der Spiegel article [5], realistically he would first have to find a way to curtail these EU governments and their present leaders' ambitions to properly fit hisforeign policy agenda removed as POV thesis on Solana's megalomania; Some observers note that this would entail a necessary and even potentially ugly power struggle if he is to assume the powers projected for the upcoming post. In doing so, some say that if he is successful in throwing off this potential trio of resistance then some say that almost in biblical terms he might be said to have "subdued" (i.e., won power struggles) against three of the ten countries projected to have weighted power in the forthcoming European Union under its new constitution, assuming the new already signed European Union constitution is timely ratified is more of the same; crafted by him is more of the same; Many foresee a power struggle which they believe Solana will win to determine whether or not one voice, or a trio, shall speak for Europe is more of the same; Javier Solana and/or his successor in office OR the France-Germany-Great Britain leadership presently appearing threatened by the potential powers of his forthcoming office. and more, This is a possible indicator of just how powerful Javier Solana has become is yet more; It may portend that he has veto power over the Executive Commission itself. and more; On the other hand, it may indicate that despite Solana's hopes that Europe will see fit to speak with one voice through him, that it is not happening as fast or fully as Solana may have liked. is totally POV and only suffices to confirm the thesis of the author. Wikipedia is not the place for this slanted garbage. --SqueakBox 17:46, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)

Drawing parallels between Javier Solana and the new EU projected machinery and the ominous developments of the rise of Hitler in Germany and what he did and failed to do does certainly not a "Nazi apologist" make. Squeakbox editing something of this magnitude is somewhat akin to a New York graffiti artist correcting the fresco in the Sistine Chapel. The author of this piece is an internationally known author and a 30 year lawyer (archived by the way by the University of Michigan's Bentley Historical Library), who unlike Squeakbox by his own admission on his personal page, flunked LOGIC. Now THAT I COULD BELIEVE. His work, per my observation is a bad combination of ignorance and threats. The page should be reverted to its references -- by removing good links to valid, living EU documents which he considers somehow harmful to whatever agenda he is projecting, he has done no good to anybody, except perhaps his ego. Certainly not to Wikipedia! Solana's job was created by Section 666 of the Vienna Council of the the European Union in December 1998 [6]-- how can anybody determine if a position legitimately exists if they can't even go to the bill reference for fear of SQUEAKBOX! I don't know what Squeakbox is afraid of -- the truth?

Squeakbox who has a clear New Age agenda (astrology, Rastafarian, etc.) has an even deeper interest in disinformation for the New Age. He is erasing accurate information, including the official EU links to the official source documents. May God have mercy on his soul!

Conclusion

I have now eliminated the POV thesis that Solana is a megalomaniac from this article. Please do not reinsert this thesis, as Wikipedia is not the place for it. I have also cleaned up a lot of bad English, removing loads of unnecessary verbiage, but have only commented here on the POV material that I have moved. --SqueakBox 17:54, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)

I have noted that it is 68.61.150.80 talk contributions who not only placed on this page most of the comments debating with me last night and this morning, but also at 10:48, Jan 10, 2005 wrote this They point out that Solana has obviously done by a combination of borrowed NATO military power and diplomacy what some historians say Hitler failed to do: reduce the Balkans. Some view this with apprehension in view of Jacques Santers' stated aims and recent calls by France to dislodge the United States as a competing superpower. I would describe the first sentence of the 2 as the work of a Nazi apologist. It is certainly the worst bit I have deleted from the article, and should have been deleted immediately, in my opinion.--SqueakBox 19:07, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)

666 removal proposal

I propose to remove all the 666 references to this article as being completely irrelevant. I believe they have been inserted in a kind of subtle vandalism by people convinced Solana is the Beast. They add nothing to the content of the article, and are unnecessary and meaningless. This just isn't wiki style. What do other people think? --SqueakBox 19:21, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)

I have now removed the 2 references to 666 from this article. I seriously suggest that if anyone feels they want this material in Wikipedia that it should be taken to the Number of the Beast (numerology) article, where it could be used to expand the sentence already there about Solana.--SqueakBox 01:24, Mar 3, 2005 (UTC)

Fine by me. --One Salient Oversight 05:15, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Comment and reply

Squeakbox who has a clear New Age agenda (astrology, Rastafarian, etc.) has an even deeper interest in disinformation for the New Age. He is erasing accurate information, including the official EU links to the official source documents. May God have mercy on his soul! User:Cumbey talk contributions

We all have prejudices, and it is fine to both have them and display them on one's user page. If anyone can point out where I have put that prejudice into the articles I edit please bring it to my attention on my talk page. I can choose to write on any subject I care to, but when I do so I stick to the NPOV Wikipedia rule. --SqueakBox 18:09, Mar 3, 2005 (UTC).

Cumbey is most definitely Special:contributions/ 68.61.150.80 who has contributed many edits (See the history of Cumbey's talk page. Thankyou for revealing your identity, and I hope you will use your account every time you make edits in the future, and sign any further comments on this page. SqueakBox 22:17, Mar 3, 2005 (UTC)

Vandalism

I discovered that Solana had been vandalised by leaving a fixed version of it (not the currently re-edited one) on feb 17th, and have only now reverted it to a redirect. Francisco Javier Solana Madariaga and Francisco Javier Solana are also redirects to this site, so keep them on your watchlists. SqueakBox 20:12, Mar 4, 2005 (UTC)

Francisco Javier Solana Madariaga and Francisco Javier Solana were both created to vandalise Solana. I have put them up for delete. Please vote to see them deleted, as they serve no other purpose than that of being vandalised in the future, and are a form of subtle vandalism. Admins? A case for speedy deletion I think. --SqueakBox 21:08, Mar 4, 2005 (UTC)

Is User:Cumbey using sockpuppets?

No --SqueakBox 23:54, Mar 5, 2005 (UTC)

Is User:Cumbey doing POV edits

Yes --SqueakBox 23:54, Mar 5, 2005 (UTC)

It would be good if User:Cumbey could respond to these allegations. --SqueakBox 17:13, Mar 5, 2005 (UTC)

User Cumbey is denying that the vandal sites belong to her in her above FYI comment, as it was 66.52.193.153 who added the comment. User:Cumbey has made a baseless accusation that SqueakBox made this comment, but it is from the USA. SqueakBox has not been on US soil since before the article began.

I don't now think User:Cumby was sockpuppeting, these other IP's are from Alabama. --SqueakBox 21:17, Mar 5, 2005 (UTC)

Guide to further SqueakBox edits

Professionally, apart from his political careers removed as unnecessary verbiage. Doesn't add to the article but does clutter it. Vast amounts of other verbiage changed. An encyclopeic entry needs to be as concise as possible. He left the USA we already know he was there, and he therefore must have left to return to Spain. Another USA referenc e removed; author wants to stress his having stufdied in the US by repetition and excess verbal clutter, but going to US given more prominent role in the sentence. That he returned with an unnamed teaching mentor removed as irrelevant. have added about PSOE and Franco. reasonable assumption people know or can guess Madrid is in Spain. Again, he was banished for political reasons for a while for his political views, i.e. opposition to the Franco government. This is a dubious assertion that must be sourced to stay in the article. In 1975 his political nemesis, Generalissimo Francisco Franco died. is POV. Thereupon Solana, expelled in his youth for anti-Franco rebellion, has been put where it belongs higher up in the paragraph. That year, also, he involved himself in Spanish political life. removed as completely unnecessary as it becomes obvious. The author either thinks everyone is a fool or is trying to put as many wordss in as possible. for the parliamentary seat he was to begin occupying in July 1977 have replaced with parliamentary. Solana has been a member of the Spanish socialist party PSOE since 1964 has already been stated. That was the year as well that he joined the "Socialist Youth". unnecessary out of place (the author is not placing events in chronological sequence , I think the Socialist youth is a bit of POV against his socialist background. He participated in the same Congress held in 1977 in Spain. reduced to in 1977. of Information and Press is clutter. ,and was also active in the Teacher's Union, the Federation of Workers of the Education of the General Union of Workers (UGT). removed as clutter. It is Fewlipe Gonzales, not Ferdinand. Shows author's lack of knowledge of Spanish politics. He was continuously a member of the Spanish parliament and is unnecessary clutter. We let you know when he stops. this is just waffle, but this kind of waffle makes the article unreadable. steadily advanced in the Ferdinand Gonzalez administration through various cabinet positions is then repeated in the next paragraph. head is POV given the views of the author. The author has a real talent for using many words when few will do. chairmanships/presidencies changed to Presidency which is how it is referred to. Those dual posts coincided in 1995. is unnecessary. Wikipedia should not speculate on coincidences, if that is what it was, which not made clear. during Spain's turn at the rotating six month presidency of the European Union clutter. We have already had this! And the author claims to have written a book. Presumably in the same style, fair enough if you want to puff little content into enough for a fat book, but not for an encyclopedia entry. It makes me laugh. I suspect the author is pumping her content full of words to mask the facty thart she doesn't actually know that much about Solana. The material I am adding comes from here. When Spain held the rotating Presidency of the Council of the European Union and the Western European Union, Solana was designated these posts. removed because I don't know what posts the author is referring to, therefore nor will the reader.

On November 20th, 1995, while Spain held the rotating EU Presidency, Solana concluded a treaty between the European Union and Israel. [7] Although scheduled to go into effect on January 1, 1997, the treaty was not ratified until June 1, 2000. Why did the author include this. I am not sure if it is relevant, but have left it in at the momnent.

including 52 United States congressmen who telegraphically protested his appointment because of his alleged Marxism and open Castro sympathies. removed as American-centred POV and replaced with a little bit.

according to the Spanish press odd statement from someone who does not read Spanish. Removed as clutter.

NO capitalised is POV.

Removed comment implying Solana's unusual role in NATO as trying to push the megalomaniac thesis, once again. The Secretary General of NATO has a ministerial role, passing on instructions from the member nations' consensus to its military components, should be in the NATO article, we don't need a lecture here on how NATO works (or basically on how Solana made it work differently as part of his Antichrist work. For example smacks of trying to prove a point, which we know the author is doing. further is the same.

Kept the Allbright quote but removed the Clinton one as overkill. yes, we know he had military authority in Yugoslavia with having it interminably repeated. reported to and took orders from Solana, reports is unnecessary, and was only inserted to stress Solana's power. of course he was powerful, he was head of NATO, and obviously Clark's boss. The obvious cannot be explained in every Wiki article. the place for stuff about his NATO powers is in the NATO article. here we only comment on how he used those powers. Name of book removed as clutter, we can read about this in the Clark article.

reflected briefly and then removed as clutter. --SqueakBox 19:50, Mar 6, 2005 (UTC)

Put something in about the agreement to end hostilities with Russia; should have been there already in such a long article! as he had once been on a USA list of subversives removed, have kept his anti NATO pamphlet but this is just proving a point. We only need one example that his appointment was a surprise to many. More is trying to prove a point, and cluttering up the actual content of the article, making it look more knowledgeable than is actually the case.

as Secretary General is article expanding junk. Almost as if this article has been spammed, which is exactly the case, spammed by the Solana Beast thesis. Office of the removed from title. Author likes overly long title but they only confuse the reader.

also more informally called "Señor PESC" ("Mr PESC", in Spanish media this is a term I have only heard in Spain, where it is only Mr PESC. May have been inserted to make the author seem knowledgeable. removed as irrelevant to English Wiki. Post of European Security Commissioner) appears to be more of a very long title. He was also given the title and responsibility of is more waffle. Pending twice in the same sentence, a poor English trait of the author.

the ten nation WEU noted that under its governing treaties complete merger could not occur, and therefore they supported a proposal to have the WEU Secretary General and CFSP High Representative (both roles od Solana) preside over the PSC (Political Security Committee) and convene the council of the European Union in the event of an emergency. (Such an emergency was declared after the (March 11, 2004) Madrid train bombings removed as megalomania thesis that clutters up the article. it just serves to confuse the reader, not to inform them.

This appointment came on the same day as major world leaders were gathering at deceased British author Sir Harold Acton's old Italian villa, owned by New York University's School of Law. The gathering was of the Third Way Movement. Solana was in attendance at the villa as were U.S. President and Mrs. Clinton, British Prime Minister Tony Blair, Romano Prodi and many other distinguished transatlantic leaders. removed as I cannot see why it has been inserted, and the author does not explain. Solana is always going to conferences with world leaders. What is so special about this one? Please explain why it is there if you want it back in the article.

and serve at the pleasure of Javier Solana is POV megalomania thesis. Some of this stuff is hilarious, but needs removing all the same.

All foreign ambassadors of the European Union entity (as opposed to its individual countries) as well as all EU military personnel are accountable to the Council of the European Union through Javier Solana is just there to tell us how powerful Solana is.

The EU's hope is that the pending new European constitution will strengthen and extend this European federal-type set of structures. is both POV and should be in the EU article as it isn't relevant to Solana.

even all is speculation and untrue speculation at that as he has many people working for him, as the author has gone to great lengths to establish.

did most or of the spearheading and is unnecessary verbiage.

Barcelona Process does not need brackets as it has been deleted and redirected to Barcelona Conference.

expected is speculation to fulfil author's thesis of the dangers of EU power, and thus POV as well.

This conference was opened by him on November 27, 1995 removed as waffle before his opening statement.

He opened by declaring that it was auspicious that it began on the 900th anniversary of the calling of the first crusade by Pope Urban II, and commented "What a lot of intolerance and misunderstanding that led to." removed as unnecessary clutter. i cannot see what it is doing here. Please explain the point of it's insertion.?

In his tenure with the European Union, is clutter as we already know what time period we are referring to.

Javier Solana has been relatively busy on the world stage negotiating various integration treaties with South American countries such as is more meaningless clutter. It is Middle East, not Mideast.

Bolivia and Colombia I don't think we need to know which Latin countries, especially as we don't get to know which Middle Eastern countries.

the leadership of is clutter.

through Solana unnecessary clutter that can be assumed

Some British and American observers stated that perhaps the EU's motives were to dislodge the USA as the only superpower in the coming 21st century struggle for increasingly scarce global resources. is speculation of a political kind about the EU, and not about Solana. especially for the latter reason has been removed.

Solania removed as a word from one of the old Yugoslavia languages. Is not English.

the possibility of clutters unnecessarily.

claimed we are not here to write about his claims

loose is very vague an unhelpful; if people want to know about the Union they should follow the links.

Avoided Montenedgro twice in the same sentence. I have repaired the next sentence, the author was finding it hard to express themselves because they weren't using prepositions properly.

Claimed replaced by stated. Let's just put what he said.

Local media named the new country "Solania" . Still other observers have pointed to this as a "Balkan reduction." the first sentence is an obscure term, and was put in to explain the previous title heading. I fear that the author does not know what they are talking about with the extremely sensitive issue of Yugoslavia, and this complex subject (of his role in Yugoslavia]] could anyway do with a much better treatment. Have left almost intact. Balkan reduction is an unclear expression that needs explaining exactly what it is before reinsertion into the article.

As the anti-Franco activist in his youth and the anti-NATO activist in his 40s combined with his leadership of NATO in his 50s, Javier Solana has sometimes been called a "squarer of circles" (i.e. reconciler of opposites). Past illustrations of this (whether intentional or not) were his marriage to the daughter (Concepción Giménez) of a top Franco general and by his heading NATO in his fifties. He has also played an active role in the various Mideast peace processes at least between 1991 and the present time. this paragraph tells us nothing we haven't already read, and tries to draw a conclusion: that is he isd a man who reconciles different things. I have left the quote but not tried to prove it. This conclusion seems like original research.

Some Solana-watchers are noting his rise to power with growing fascination. removed as unnecessary and there as part of the megalomania thesis.

with all its projected powers is more megalomania thesis, totally unnecessary for any other reason. Given Solana's talents in securing consensus but also bringing pressure to bear where necessary, people are interested to watch how Solana and/or his successors in this office play out the role of the new EU Foreign Minister this is all megalomania thesis,

In end of February Mr. Elmar Brok, German Christian Democrat deputy, and chairman of the European parliament's foreign affairs committee warned in Brussels replaced by there has been concern

Internet link removed, all this I am removing is megalomania thesis. What I have left is an appropriate treatment of the subject, albeit a little one sided as there are those who would like to see Solana have some real power, i.e. a more unified EU so he could have that one phone call and be on an equal basis with Condoleeza Rice. But the rant has been removed.

Javier Solana's most personally listed affiliation apart from the Socialist party is the Spanish chapter of the Club of Rome put a little bit at the bottom.

On a personal level, he has been said to "eat little and sleep less;" his is reportedly "a monk's diet of fish and fruit." Some accounts state that although he is active in global disarmament efforts, his favorite personal hobby is "collecting guns". put into personal life section, where it should be with the other stuffv, not inserted here in present.

Some accounts state that although he is active in global disarmament efforts, his hobby is gun collecting is POV by making the connection between the 2. One has nothing to do with the other.

Removed one of the 2 Kissinger internet links. We only need one, 2 is trying to push some kind of a point.

Post June 29, 2004, many other sources were making the same observation -- that Kissinger (and anybody else) could ring up Europe by calling just calling Javier Solana. This sentence just repeats what has already been said. to make the article look big, and prove it's megalomania thesis. i have done a major rewrit.

his potential powers is the second mention of powers in this sentence.

Family life

This piece is far too long, goes on and on abbout obscure things like Osho, and needs editing drastically to let the reader get on to his career.

Salvador de Madariaga at various times served as Spanish ambassador to the United States and as chief of the Disarmament Section of the League of Nations. He also had a teaching career at England's Oxford University. Salvador de Madariaga was admiringly said to be one of the ten best conversationalists in all of Europe in his day. His writing career ranged from books about Christopher Columbus to analyses of what he considered to be the growing Communist threat to Latin America. All this is at Salavador de Madariaga, and is excessive treatment at Javier Solana.

She was professionally and academically known as is unnecessary verbiage, saying in two sentences what can be said in one.

de Madariaga's daughter we have already established it is a maternal link, and don't need reminding.

like her more famous father unnecessary repetition. Author seems to think it is only by repetition we will get the point.

Her full name at the time of her death was Nieves Hayat de Madariaga Mathews. Just give her name the once. Just more repetition.}, confusing and irritating the reader.

upwards of meaningless.

Her Yale University-published book on the life of Sir Francis Bacon was released in 1996. The 606 page volume is entitled, Francis Bacon: The History of a Character Assassination.[[8]] Nieves de Madariaga Mathews claimed in her acknowledgements that the book was suggested and blessed by "my teacher, Osho, who thought highly of Francis Bacon and gave the book his blessing." As well as Rajneesh, Solana's mother was equally deeply and publicly influenced by the works of Immanuel Velikovsky. She devoted much time to her pursuit of both Velikovsky and Sir Francis Bacon literacy and causes is all about his mother, and has no relevance to him. It appears to be here because the author wanted to make a connection between Osho, a New Ager, and Solana. The connection is so lame as to be pathetic and does not deserve conclusion. What I have left is perfectly adequate for his mother.

Javier Solana's only maternal aunt is Isabel de Madariaga, a professor emeritus of Slavonic Studies at the College of London. A brilliant and thorough scholar, she has published extensive historical works, most notably about Russian empress, Catherine the Great. I don't think this a strong enough connection to merit being here. People want to read about Solana, not long digressions about his family.

he was the first known Socialist party member to join the Trilateral Commission. i don't think we need to know this about the brother, whose piece I have put in chronological order.

Like his older brother, Javier Solana, is an active member of the Trilateral Commission. Although not eligible for membership as he is not an American citizen, Javier Solana is a frequent speaker and enjoys excellent relationships with members of the prestigious US based Council on Foreign Relations Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) He is likewise active with the Foreign Policy Association (FPA) as well as the New York city based East West Institute. has oddly been inserted in the family section, where it should not be. Editing and putting at the bottom

On Solana's paternal side, his grandfather was Don Ezequiel Solana de Ramirez. He was an educatorand text book author who died in 1931. Luis and Javier's father was Don Ezequiel Solana's son Francisco Solana. removed as not noteworthy grandfather.

As of 2004, there is increased reliance on Javier Solana by the EU and the WEU. more megalomania thesis that states nothing meaninful, and may not be accurate.

The author has not put events in their chronological order, which I have now done.

Solana stunned the world, Israel included, by replying that like it or not, both is pure POV and should not be in a balanced political article.

He is presently may be the major player in structuring a peace plan between is speculation that should, if appropriate, be in a Middle Eastern article.

Under his auspices the EU is combining with other major players to guarantee regional security for the time any treaty achieved is in force is speculation abouit what will happen if a treaty comes into force, not a certainty, maybe not even likely, so this should not be here.

He is achieving this both through his "Barcelona Process" and the "Roadmap for Peace" in the Middle East, for which he is also acknowledged as a major architect. [9] The author has already dealt with all this extensively in another section. This is repetition.

The Barcelona conference piece was in the wrong section. it happened while he was still Spanisjh foreign Minister. by putting it in Solana's post NATO section author ias attempting to confuse us into thinking Solana was more powerful than he really was at the time of the Barcelona Conference. This smacks as a deliberate attempt to misinform.

In spite of reported Solana ambitions the EU does not hold a seat in the UN. Please check your facts! --SqueakBox 22:54, Mar 6, 2005 (UTC)

First paragraph edit

As such he would combine the positions of Commissioner of External Relations (currently held by Benita Ferrero-Waldner) and Common Foreign and Security Policy chief currently held by him. What he would be if the EU constitution were ratified is pure speculation, and was only put in the article to support author's megalomania thesis. That advisory body is expected to grow. is more of the same. He has a cabinet of his own. is just saying he has people working for him, which is pretty obvious. removed as unnecessary megalomania thesis. Link removed. If you want it back go put it in the external link section

Under the new constitution, he would become a powerful figure in the EU government, having a power of initiative only shared with the presidency. He would also automatically serve as Vice President of the European Commission. This is more "what if the EU constition were ratified?" material to again remind us (asif we could forget) of how powerful he would become. I personally object to these anti-EU inserts, and don't feel they are Wiki spirit. effective upon full ratification in 2006. after which is expected to be ratified in 2006 is a classic example of the author repeating themselves meaninglessly, and I have left one date in and nothing here ratification because if people want that info they can follow the link to EU constitution. Again, párt of a position created by the European Union's "Council of Vienna" in December 1998. I have deleted this as highly contentious to Beast believers and pretty irrelevant to everyone else. it is not needed in a political treatment, and it smells of Beast paranoia. --SqueakBox 04:13, Mar 7, 2005 (UTC)

Edit wars

No edit wars please. If you disagree with any of my edits, discuss it here. I have put the article into chronological order, removed the repetitions, removed the POV, and it now looks much more like a normal political article. --SqueakBox 22:54, Mar 6, 2005 (UTC)

I hope even the Beast believers will find the new article clearer, easier to understand, and with both more and more accurate information about Solana in it. --SqueakBox 04:13, Mar 7, 2005 (UTC)

Further editing

Solana is known as the "tsar" of European military and foreign policy. removed as contentious. By whom is he known as the tsar? Certainly not the people of Europe. --SqueakBox 01:40, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC)

Solana formerly worked with theno longer travels with the EU rotating presidency and the Commissioner of External Affairs as the reigning EU "troika" -- since the vote of the Council of Ministers, Solana now speaks and travels as the sole voice rather than one of three voices. has been removed unless it can be proven to be true. there certainly is a Commissioner of External Affairs still. i don't trust Cumbey's knowledge of EU poliotics, and suspect she may have inserted this after making it up. It is certainly another one of her evidences that he is the beast. So source it or it goes forever. --SqueakBox 01:54, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC)

While Spain held the rotating EU Presidency, Solana concluded a treaty between the European Union and Israel. [10] Although scheduled to go into effect on January 1, 1997 it was not ratified until June 1, 2000. removed as not being relevant except to those who want to make uis believe Solana is the devil.

which hopes to lead to a Mediterranean free trade zone by 2010. The conference concluded with the 27 nations signing the Barcelona Treaty. removed. People can read about this in Barcelona Conference, we do not need it in the article. It also clearly is a part of Cumbey's paranioa conspiracy.--SqueakBox 02:27, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC)

and he was given new powers to make military decisions. is more conspiracy theory junk.--SqueakBox 02:28, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC)

Cumbey

[Personal attack against SqueakBox removed, as per Wikipedia:Remove personal attacks. -- Curps 04:39, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

SqueakBox

Wiki elite is open to everyone, like wikipedia. She vandalised the GFU agreement in the article there with a personal attack, and it is now locked and licenced with the same version as here. I, of course, cannot delete articles at wiki elite, even less the history page, as Cumbey well knows. She is too much becaise all she does is attack. She used a sockpuppet there at wikielite in a vain attempt to cover up her vandalsim. i imagine they are furious, but probasbly not wityh me. i am not, anyway, blocked. Please stop attacking me Cumbey. i am being civil to you, and have never broken the vandalism rule at wikipedia or wiki elite. Good night. I am bored of all this, --SqueakBox 04:35, Mar 13, 2005 (UTC)

SqueakBox

You are engaging in personal attacks because you have nothing credible to say. Only POV paranoid conspiracy theorist pseudo-Christians are going to believe that your inaccurate and disorganised anti EU rant is anything other a bunch of lies put together to discredit someone. Threatening people with legal action is frowned upon in Wikipedia. I have every right to investigate anonymous IP addresses in a serious case like that of Solana, or anyway if I care to. I am also not asccusing you of ising sockpuppets or using IP addresses that were not from the Detroit area of Michigan. You have refused to help me in any way with my investigations. Threatening me with legal action for trying to get to the bottom of this case is not the spirit of wiki collaboration. I think One Salient Point is wrong to think you are not a troll (though perhaps he changed his mind after you vandalised my home page, a vandalsim someone else reverted that was personally insulting, not to mentiomn without foundation. You are getting the user page muddled up with the User talk page which is not only there for you. I removed what you had left at your User talk page about yourself to your user page. The only person who has been libelled in this case is Javier Solana, by User:Cumbey and others of her ilk. Go to a therapist to deal with your anger. Don't take it out on me just because I trashed your truly terrible article. You still have not explained how getting rid of the inaccuracies, reorganising the article and geting rid of the Beast evidences makes for a worse article.--SqueakBox 03:18, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC)

Accusing me of cutting across your edits- now you are accusing me of being responsible for the gremlins in the technology. I get the same edit conflict, often when no-one else is editing. To me accuse me of cutting across youer edits 2000 miles away imputeds psychic powers I do not have. Don't bring my mother into this ever again. It is common practice to choose a User name. Do you think I started that too. When will Cumbey shut up with her personal smears and engage in a debate about the content of the article. --SqueakBox 03:29, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC)

Barcelona Conference

I have put this one up for delete as an utterly unnotable conference, and am removing it's refernce from the Solana article.--SqueakBox 03:50, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC)

Oh, yeah, what is likely the most important conference in the Mediterranean era, covering dozens upons dozens of countries "utterly unnotable". As a sidenote please comment your edits, because it's an utter hell to figure out when you deleted what piece of info. One of these days I'll need to find the time to go through the whole history of the article and revert *both* whatever crap the loonie fundies have inserted *and* your mass deletions of real info. Aris Katsaris 04:03, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)

Check the archive history before starting to complain. I don't think you know what has been going on here? Let's see if Barcelona Conference is deleted before deciding to put it back in? Mass deletion of real info is completely OTT from someone who could not be bothered to clear up the previous mess themselves. I believe that in spite of being shorter the article actually contained more info. If you want to bring legitimate info back in, go for it, but don't do little and then criticise me for not creating the perfect article. Your jumping in with criticisms do no-one a favour. I am anyway investigating to add other info. --SqueakBox 15:44, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)

I have changed my mind and decided to go for keeping Barcelona Conference.--SqueakBox 01:44, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)

Edit war

Cumbey has reverted my work without discussing content and without bothering to correct the inaccuracies I have pointed out. It is not Ferdinand González etc. I have therefore reverted it as the vandalism it is. --SqueakBox 03:44, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC)

Cumbey has now reverted the article and added a further rant about 21st century american interests that was also removed as a second bit of vandalism. I consider what she is doing is pure vandalism. She is reverting to a version she knows is inaccurate. The 3RR rule does not apply to vandalsim. she is not bothering to correct her reverts. i am getting really annoyed that she calls Felipe González Ferdinand. if she disputes my edits she must engage in a content debate with me.--SqueakBox 05:04, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC)

I am convinced. Cumbey is trolling. How's this for a suggestion SB, why don't you take some time off from this war? I'll contact some administrators I know and ask them to start banning IP addresses. If that doesn't work then we can get the hierarchy involved and maybe even prevent the article from being edited for a time. One Salient Oversight 05:27, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I've just checked the official way of doing things. You need to do the following:

1. Create a new article Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User:Cumbey
2. Go to the article Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Example user
3. Copy the text from Example User and Paste it into the new article. Don't cut and paste, copy and paste.
4. Fill out all the details in the RFC you are creating.
5. After you have created the page, go to Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment#Article_content_disputes
6. Fill in a short explanation of what is going on (you can see from the list how to write it)

Once you have done that, give me a buzz. I'll contact some admins I know. One Salient Oversight 05:35, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Note by Constance Cumbey

To illustrate the viciousness this has taken by Squeakbox and his friends, they went to my own talk page and pasted it to this page! But the remarks are accurate! User Cumbey

UserCumbey is a troll who has broken the 3RR rule with 6 vandalising reverts and is troll patrolling this site with her wilful and inaccurate vandalisms. --SqueakBox 10:49, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC)

Getting Cumbey comments

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User:Cumbey; put your thoughts here about Cumbey. --SqueakBox 11:17, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC)

The factual errors in Cumbey's text

This is the version, partially edited by me and hence devoid of the Hitler comparison, that Cumbey was reverting to.

In Education, Early Career, and Associations it states that the ex President of Spain is called Ferdinand González, not Felipe González.

Barcelona Conference is in the Roles in the EU and the Western European Union section. but it took place in November 1995, 4 years before this section began. it needs to be in the Education, Early Career, and Associations section.

In Roles in the EU and the Western European Union Middle East countries are called Mideast countries.

In my opinion if anyone reverts the current article to the former Cumbey version without correcting these mistakes that they will be acting in bad faith, and put the reputation of wikipedia as an accurate source of material at risk unnecessarily, and to engage in an edit war. So if you want to engage in an edit war (please don't) do not reinsert these incorrect bits of information and then claim you have edited the article in good faith. Deliberately inserting falsehoods that have been pointed out on this page is not acting in good faith, in my opinion.--SqueakBox 01:42, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)

Moving on

User:Aris Katsaris just added something; so it would have to revert the work of 2 people now. Good to see the article is beginning to attract European input as well again, instead of being solidly American and SqueakBox. User:Cumbey has told me she agrees to try to resolve this dispute in the talk pages, so I am hoping there will not be a repeat edit war scenario.--SqueakBox 03:48, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)

Global Elite Wiki

Cumbey put the article in here as was. I have updated that version to as it is [11].--SqueakBox 15:13, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)

New edits

I started an article on Nieves and removed the red link from Constance Archibald, but if an article about her appears it should, of course, be relinked.--SqueakBox 16:28, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)

Cumbey threats

These threats were received by email. User:Cumbey claims SqueakBox is hacking into the wiki database. She is going to demand the hard discs from Jimbo Wales so she can get me put down for a long time because of my alleged hacking. She accuses me of having a stash of janja (sic) she means ganja, in my possession, and that she is going to tell the Honduran police about it. She is going to write to Jimbo demanding he reinstate her version of this article. She is very unhappy with the new contributors. She thinks they work for me and I work for Solana.--SqueakBox 14:40, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)

I am taking Cumbey to Wikipedia:Requests for mediation. I am not willing to tolerate her personal threats against me, either through email or in wikipedia.--SqueakBox 20:26, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)

Virginia

From the Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Barcelona Conference insert tonight from Reston, Virginia I conclude that Cumbey has also been contributing from there. No vandalism has ever come from Reston, Virginia, though I didn't like her trying to reveal private info about me at the debate there tonight, and so removed it. --SqueakBox 04:29, Mar 18, 2005 (UTC)

Vandalism

According to 2 IP locators the last 2 IP addresses who vandalised, 68.159.154.196 and 68.159.154.119 (very similar numbers, only the last 2 digits different) both came from an unspecified location in Michigan. I am not suggesting Cumbey is behind this (she lives in Michigan but 68.159.154.196 also wiped Al Gore, which is NOT Cumbey's style) but given the persistent problem this page has from Beast believers I would urge her and all legitimate contributors to sign in and not edit anonymously. --SqueakBox 19:12, Mar 29, 2005 (UTC)

Cumbey's new edit warring

I have justified my edits on the talk page. Cumbey never justifies her edits. She must now put here her reasons for every single line of her edits, and not just edit war, which is totally contrary to wikipedia spirit. This is not Christianpedia and rightwing Christian POV merchants determined to ruin wikipedia with original and highly POV works are not welcome here. Cumbey is engaging in a war she will not win, and I advice her to stop before she gets herself blocked again. In Cumbey's version she insists on wrongly putting barcelona conference in the wrong place in spite of being corrected both by me and Aris Katsaris on this point. I believe she is not interested in working consensusally, and I am seeking mediation, --SqueakBox 15:04, Apr 2, 2005 (UTC)

Ownership of this article

BTW in her edit summary Cumbey talked of SqueakBox's dumbed down version. First, no personal attacks please. Second, it is not my version. At least 7 other logged in users have contributed to this article since I made my major changes, though even after making them there was, and is, still a great deal of Cumbey's input. So the current version can in no way be considered my version. Please do not disseminate the falsehood that it is my version. Cumbey claims the end of Feb version is hers, which is not true either. Wikipedia is a collaborative effort, --SqueakBox 16:44, Apr 2, 2005 (UTC)