Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Pathological Schizophrenia

So you guys know, yes, there was a specific reason for making this page. Pathological Schizophrenia is the secondary diagnosis that was carried by Mr Robert Edwards, born in Hobart, Tasmania in 1965, who was sent to a mental hospital in Risdon Vale at the age of 5, and lived there until 1992 when he was released in to normal society. His primary diagnosis was severe clinical depression. Due to the primary diagnosis, the secondary one became outwardly dominant, such that he was constantly changing his identity. This was as a direct result of his own self loathing. This is the profile of a serial killer, whose deeds started in a sense on April 27, 1995, but more famously on April 27, 1996, when he killed 2 people to commence a year long killing spree that resulted in the deaths of over 100 people Australia wide. 35 of those deaths, over the 3 day period April 27-April 29, 1996 were called the Port Arthur Massacre. His year-long killing spree is often referred to as "the mission" or "the plan".

Getting a page for his condition is therefore essential. The guy certainly didn't have traditional schizophrenia, since he had full control over which personality he adopted. And he was NEVER himself. That doesn't fit schizophrenia. What does it fit? I was told that his diagnosis was pathological schizophrenia, and that was what was written on his medical reports. But hey, who am I to comment? I'm not doctor. Maybe they were lies too. So what is a diagnosis that leads to someone doing that kind of thing? You can call him a psychopath if you like, but that's really a bit broad. Homicidal maniac? He was really a lot worse than any of that. He was good enough that he never got caught. 203.26.206.129 13:45, 26 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Transfer of commentary[edit]

Below is commentary that seems to be a personal correspondence, instead of votes pertiment to the VfD. Feel free to restore these comments if you thenk they are relivant--Tznkai 16:34, 26 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to reference Wikipedia:Guide_to_Votes_for_deletion, which I believe that you have failed to abide by in your initial statements. What you have written there constitutes a personal attack, and encourages an attack on the author, not on the article. 203.26.206.129 12:00, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My comments were about the article, in the form that it existed in at the time I nominated it, not about its author. -- The Anome 12:25, May 24, 2005 (UTC)

The following words "unverifiable", "unhelpful" and "extreme prejudice" indicate a personal attack on the author. I hope that that spells it out clearly. Internodeuser 12:53, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: See Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#User:Internodeuser before taking wisdom from anything the submitter has to say about personal attacks. -- Longhair | Talk 08:33, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is that even necessary? His argument alone doesn't make any sense. The idea that "unverifiable" is a personal attack is wonderfully nonsensical. --Fastfission 23:52, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

- - - - It's not necessary, and it is something that is being done specifically to harass me and to "get more people on side" against me. Wonderful ploy by Longhair there. Add it to every page he can find, so that its not just me against him, its me vs everyone. Very clever. Such a brilliant liar, is longhair. Congratulations for falling for it. 203.26.206.129 13:39, 26 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the real reason that you nominated this page for deletion is because you are targetting me, and trying to use it to justify numerous personal attacks against me. I think that you should admit this reason, and then immediately remove the vfd tag. 203.26.206.129 11:53, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please understand, I'm not targetting you. In fact, I was up to this point unaware that you were coming from the same IP range as the author of some other articles I had nominated; I don't generally memorize IP ranges for more than half an hour or so, unless I have some special reason to. I have now been informed on my talk page as to your identity. -- The Anome 12:21, May 24, 2005 (UTC)

Comment. I see now that this article was created by Internodeuser, who also created Port Arthur massacre theories, which is also currently up on VfD. If you read the article, it seems that he has an ax to grind over the medical diagnosis of schizophrenia and this plays a role in his Port Arthur conspiracy theories. Quale 20:45, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Very good. This diagnosis was the secondary diagnosis of the person who committed the Port Arthur Massacre (he carried a primary diagnosis of severe depression) and demonstrates why and how he was capable of doing it, which is very important to keep as a means of validating that and other articles. 203.26.206.129 08:18, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]