In particular, their time developing the With the cancellation of the Anarky series, and the eventual departure of each artist from DC Comics— first by Grant, followed by Breyfogle— their mutual career paths split, and Anarky entered into a period of obscurity.During this period, Breyfogle came to suspect that the treatment each man, and Anarky, had received from their former employer was suspect. I see it in the treatment from Wikipedia; I see it in the treatment toward Alan Grant from DC Comics; I see it in the treatment from mainstream media and the establishment.
The problem is that there is little or no third party references to him and his work, so that we have little mandate to add this information to the article.Until a third-party reference to his opinions on biological immortality is made, we can’t include it here.—Cast (talk) , 18 August 2009 (UTC)You don’t need third party references for this article.Wikipedia: Verifiability says “Self-published or questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, especially in articles about themselves…” Source#Sources So you can use books by Wallace, published by Wallace, in an article about Wallace to describe his views and philosophy.After my father died, this “Bi” harbored an obsession to destroy my father, his works, credibility, reputation and legacy.
“Bi” proliferated across the web the idea that Neo-Tech Mediation Page: Requests_for_mediation/Frank_R._Wallace After browsing through those four Talk pages (four links directly above), remember that Jimmy Wales saw all this yet seemed blind to the obvious: a person obsessed with destroying someone featured on Wikipedia, stalking his page and finding excuses to remove positive or even neutral remarks, can cause a much greater negative force at work than a positive or neutral force.
So there are no articles, other than the attack articles.
Well, those published attacks make it too easy for those out to discredit the idea system and its creator to overwhelm those Wikipedia articles with negativity using Wikipedia’s sacred policy of third-party sourcing and citations — Wikipedia’s Holy Grail: third-party sourcing from published sources…yes, articles written by the very journalists and bloggers who deeply dislike Neo-Tech too easily remove legitimate representation of the idea system by calling it “too much original material” as evidenced today, years later, on my father’s Talk page, Frank_R._Wallace, a section from the Talk page shown below: You don’t need third party references for this article.
Yet the comments on my father’s Wikipedia Talk page today, several years later, indicate that, indeed, there was something wrong: Frank_R._Wallace .
Below I copy/pasted from my father’s Wikipedia Talk page at the time of this article: is.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) , 22 July 2010 (UTC) Anonymous “Bi” and occasional ally (he used sock puppets) overwhelmed the edit wars by easily, repeatedly stating there are no third-party sources supporting original material or obvious facts.