Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Reddi 2/Workshop

I am most unclear how to proceed with this case. As I've stated at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Reddi 2#Statement by Pjacobi I see serious problems with Reddi's contributions in the fields of science and pseudoscience, but this has little direct relationship with the point which started this RfAr (It is indirectly related, as it seems to be the case that Reddi resorts to personal attack if someone has enough patience to defend articles against him)

Does it make sense to elaborate these points?

Should I start seperate dispute resolution?

Pjacobi 21:14, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Pjacobi has not editing in good faith nor in a NPOV fashion. Especially by continually removing links to standard physics, where connection exists in the article (such as in the Scalar field theory article; which also spurred him to post on 16:18, 17 December 2005 Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Reddi 2/Evidence). J. D. Redding 21:26, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]