False accusations 

I have been accused of sock puppeting, yet they still havnt brought one single piece of tangible proof, even though the other person claimed he was from mexico, which I am from the states. The main reason why I was initially blocked was because of Bigcat82, as his false accusations, bias moderating, lies, misinformation and more lies...7 different people have noted he was bias, and still he is allowed to control the lion vs tiger section with only repeating its not reliable or not a peer journal, none of this is true, for instance, his account where he put on lion vs tiger has been sitting there for going on 6 years and still no one has even peered into it, it is a straight up lie that he said the lion was killed, here is the full article of the 1909 fight:

[url]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-NuqIbte0hB8/T8DE0k29m2I/AAAAAAAAyuI/uNemgrJ-vfI/s1600/Anotherfightatbostocks.jpg[/url]

Miss informs people, and twists facts, he uses this tactics on the roman accounts, leaving out who won in popmeii and following it in with a non credible source William bridges is not a historian, but he uses it to capitalize on the archaeology book, in fact that book roots to the fact the lion defeated the tiger, as roman/italian sites says the tiger is being attacked by a lion:
[url]http://www.romanoimpero.com/2010/01/pompei.html[/url]

He routes it to the usual that it was a leopard, but the leopard mosaic is in the house of doves, the lion standing over a prostrated tiger is in the house of faun. Several members point out his major flaws such as Bbbeto, as he states its not that the sources arnt reliable he just doesnt want anything that favors the lion and will show the lion as the usual winner, its not that they arent peer jorunals, its that the support the lion, he has erased over 20 things not seeable now on the talk page and edit page, it doesnt matter if its from a trainer, if they support the lion he will call it unreliable and the rules dont apply...what rules? Its only his rules, there hasnt been a consensus done by 10 people at once going on over 6 years? Is this what wiki is for, for who ever is the more persistent and the better liar to be able to control wiki? Its just his ) and he should be banned from editing that topic, since he is already a part of over 20 forums specifically on topic where he has been caught lying, for instance he just said he has graduated from 10 university's...
[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BigCat82[/url]

Really he graduated from 10 of the top university around the world? Show us just one of them, name the university, show us who you studied under, show us a copy of your diploma, he is a pathological liar, look under the bear contributions countless of people call him specifically a tiger fan, look at the talk page there, the lion vs tiger contribution, only he is ever erasing things of favoring the lion, Wikipedia mods should be ashamed for having a person use its search engine for a person pumping out his own propaganda and bias POV for this amount of time unchecked. He now says that no experts favor a lion, really? Define expert, if we look at what wiki has as expert:
[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expert[/url]

We can see that an expert is someone who has pro-longed experience or observation, the topic is about them fighting, so they have to have excerpts and citations of them seeing a fight...no excerpts of them exist for the tiger so far, yet he disputes people who does, and is considered experts.

-Clyde beatty
-Terrel jaccobs
-Bert nelson
-Peter taylor
-Dave hoover
-Damoo dhotre
-Marco Peters
-Isablela thomas
-William blackburne
-George conklin
-Dave salmoni
-Samatha stephens
-Dr antle from big cat rescue
-Dr Frank mendel

There are alot of experts who favor the lion, yet he will just lie and lie and lie that they dont, just like the accounts, there are 50 tigers killed by lions just from Clyde beatty alone:

[url]http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/139517086?searchTerm=clyde%20beatty%2050%20tigers%20killed&searchLimits;=[/url]

Lions have killed tigers hundreds of times, theres even photo evidence of the combatants:
[url]http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/83094750?searchTerm=tiger%20pries%20and%20dies%20lion&searchLimits;=[/url]
[url]http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/135423123?searchTerm=lion%20tiger%20fight%20turin&searchLimits;=[/url]
Yet the only one he accepts is the one to make like the lion is incapable of killing a tiger by highlighting they were small, female, ambushed ect...giving the appeal that lions dont stand a chance, when in fact they are taller at the shoulder, heavier as a species, has more genuine experts who favor the lion o