| Revision as of 03:41, 5 February 2007 editMinaretDk (talk | contribs)236 editsm →blocked← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 10:58, 16 February 2008 edit undoMelonBot (talk | contribs)56,411 editsm Updating links to Peer review archives | ||
| (35 intermediate revisions by 11 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{Unblock reviewed|I have been falsely accused of being a sockpuppet of the user Bhaisaab. A Usercheck revealed a "likely" finding, which really only means I live in the same city as Bhaisaab and also use the same DSL service (which happens to be the most popular DSL service in the US). Editors I have previously been in conflict with know for a fact that I'm a Bangladeshi editor, whereas Bhaisaab is Pakistani/Iranian.|decline=Per Dmcdevit at the bottom of this page; this checkuser block is final, as noted by Dmcdevit's comment below and his protection of this talk page.}} | |||
| '''Welcome!''' | |||
| Hello, {{BASEPAGENAME}}, and ] to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| I hope you enjoy editing here and being a ]! Please ] on talk pages using four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out ], ask me on my talk page, or place <code><nowiki>{{helpme}}</nowiki></code> on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! --] 19:02, 18 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| My account has been blocked as a 'sockpuppet' of "Bhaisaab". The Usercheck to justify this block suggests that I'm "likely" him, when actually all it proves is that I live in the same area as he does, and use the same DSL provider. The conclusion that I am a 'confirmed' sockpuppet of Bhaisaab is one that would require a considerable leap of 'bad faith', particularly given the editors I have been long in conflict against all know that I'm of a different ethnicity than Bhaisaab, and edit from a perspective altogether different from him. The admin "Rama's Arrow" has long been using his administrative powers to selectively block editors in a dispute by what side they argue from. He alleges my edits are "anti-Hindu" and "Pro-Islam", when nothing I've said or done has amounted to criticism of Hinduism as a religion, or promotion of Islam. I am not into theology, my interest in both articles was limited to history and the issue of human rights. He alleges my edits constitute 'disruption', when I am the only editor in those articles who follows WP policy in respect to WP:NPOV and WP:RS. He has used such differences of opinion as justification for blocks before. He's selectively silenced apparently Pakistani/Muslim editors, and placed exceptionally harsh extentions to their blocks when they strayed from his narrow road. His Hindutva activist friends however are inert, and in the very worst of cases he will restrict himself to advising them. | |||
| == warning == | |||
| If an arbcom proceeding is needed for me to prove I'm not Bhaisaab, I'm willing to participate. Bhaisaab is supposedly a Pakistani or Iranian editor (I gather that from his talk page, etc), I'm a Bangladeshi. I can prove that, and my 'rivals' here are all aware of that. I have not edited articles on Pakistani history, which is Bhaisaab's forte. My involvment in editing Hindu-related articles stems entirely from my observing an extreme bias in the article ]. Any editor interested enough to dig deep and observe the conflict will see that the articles ] and ] contain terribly biased content intentionally disfigured to present a skewed account of history. | |||
| Please do not add nonsense to Misplaced Pages{{#if:{{{1|}}}|, as you did to ]}}. It is considered ]. If you would like to experiment, use the ]. Thank you. <!-- Template:Test2 (second level warning) --> ] 23:01, 18 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| Excuse me? What nonsense? Please be specific. ] 23:57, 18 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| Diffs pending. | |||
| ::Please do not remove sourced edits and mass-blank text. It is vandalism and will be reported. If you have any problems discuss in the talk page first. Also, see ] regarding your edits to ]. Thaa. ] 00:07, 19 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::: Actually I explained myself on the talk page. Rediff is not an established reliable source, and everything else I deleted was either irrelevant, or uncited. Your talk page shows you get banned frequently, Maybe you should entertain the possibility that you are in the wrong here. ] 00:10, 19 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::No.Also, please see these refs: | |||
| ] 19:47, 8 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| What the heck?How is it the evidence is clear that Rumps is Hkelkar,but no tag for him.This is so silly.No evidence.So everyone who edit wars with Rumps/Hkelkar is automatically a sock of Bhaisaab.So we have about half a dozen Muslim editors edit warring with Rumps/Hkelkar are they socks of Bhaisaab?--] | |||
| Also, rediff is considered a reliable source on wikipedia. there is no if, and or but here.You should familiarize yourself more with wikipedia rules. Thaa. ] 00:13, 19 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :No, a technical report, ]. ''']''' (]) 02:57, 9 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| What is your point? The 'rediff' article doesn't even name its author. For all we know its copied from another publication. WP:RS outlines what makes a reliable source. Nothing to suggest rediff is a reliable source. I dont dispute US state dept is a reliable source, so thats irrelevant. Thuu. ] 00:17, 19 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::Please read ]. | |||
| ::Rediff is a reliable source. Simple. If you have issues get a mediator. ] 00:30, 19 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| Apparently. Rumplestiltskin and Bakasuprman have violated every policy of Misplaced Pages, they've attacked editors and committed obvious acts of vandalism, but because the involved admins are sympathetic to their biases (ie fellow Indians/Wikiproject Hinduism members), those people are inert to administrative sanction. They get warnings after a career of attacks, Muslim editors get blocked without explicit reasons (eg Rama's Arrow THINKS your edits are disruptive or POV). Rama himself alleges I'm anti-Hindu/pro-Islam. Diffs please? Just because I don't take to Rumplystiltskin/Bakasuprman's rewriting of history to frame Muslims as deserving of the Gujarat Massacre, or I consider the treatment of untouchables in India as a form of persecution (the UN and HRW agree with me on that) as opposed to people who CHOSE their plight (the view Baka/Rumple are promoting) doesn't mean I'm anti-Hindu, and I've done nothing to suggest I'm pro-Islam. Does thinking that figures acknowleged by the US govt and human rights organizations deserves mention in the ] article constitute anti-Hindu bias? What's the definition of neutral then? Every admin I consulted on this ridiculous block against me has responded, most saying they're helpless to do anything and that it's up to the blocking admin. The blocking admin,], however chooses to ignore my e-mails and requests. Oh,he just happens to be another member of Project India.Is it a miracle that in a dispute involving content regarding recent Indian history, all the admins using force happen to be Indian, and a disproportionate degree of that force (all as far as I can see) is applied on those editors not promoting pro-Hindutva revisionism? Tell me again how Misplaced Pages is not supposed to be a battleground. ] 22:08, 8 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == 3RR == | |||
| :The checkuser happens to show very close geographic proximity (within 8km), same company, same IP stats, etc, and "likely" is merely statistical and not dependent on perceptions due to editing patterns. This is in addition to the editing patterns of having the same interest in Indian religious articles. BS self-identified as half Iranian-Pakistani, but he edited Indian stuff (hindu-muslim) and Middle East stuff (Islam-Israel, Ahmadinejad stuff). You were suspected because for a new user you show an extremely good command of all the wiki-legal procedures and how arbitration and checkuser works. ''']''' (]) 02:57, 9 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly{{{{{subst|}}}#if:{{{1|}}}|, as you are doing in ]}}. If you continue, you may be ] from editing Misplaced Pages. Note that the ] prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for ], even if they do not technically violate the ]. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you.<!-- Template:3RR --> ] 00:17, 19 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :: As for the other stuff, being part of a WikiProject does not say anything about race or religion, so there's no need to brandish that here. Depite what a few people may think, I am neither Hindu nor Indian. A quick look at my userpage will show that my Indian article editing pertains to Indian cricketers and Buddhists. I have blocked you because it appears you are evading blocks, and have not made any content judgments or taken them into account. ''']''' (]) 02:57, 9 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :You are welcome to seek further opinions. I am not the person who could verify if you have Bengali ability, and if so, what to make of this, as I do not know how common it is amongst aubcontinental people to speak many languages. ''']''' (]) 02:58, 9 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :: Misplaced Pages is full of retarded people. The least of those retards seem to get positions as administrators. If any one of them can understand Misplaced Pages policy in a month, I can do so in a week. I've been reading this website for a while now, long enough to know the basic ropes. I know about CheckUser because "Rama's Arrow" filed that request against me, and you subsequently posted that block template directing me to it on my user page. I know of Rumplestiltskin being Hkelkar's puppet from a comment left on my talk page, and then subsequent comments by a crowd of other editors. That Rumplestiltskin is the banned Hkelkar is Misplaced Pages's worst kept secret. How long does it take to read a page and figure out what "CheckUser" might mean? Someone else did the check, how do you verify that the person is within 8 miles of my location? Do you know how many Muslims live in New York city? How many of them use Verizon DSL? If your block is grounded on statistics alone, the "Likely" result of CheckUser doesn't CONFIRM anything, merely indicates closeness of two IP users. To draw the conclusion that two people geographically located in the roughly the same area are the same person, you'd need to use their editing habits as evidence. Bhaisaab is Iranian (not Pakistani as I thought) and his edit history shows interests in Islam-related and Iranian-related articles. I'm a Bangladeshi, and my edit history shows that too, along with some sympathy for the 2000 or so Muslims killed by Hindu fanatics in Gujarat, and criticism for Hindutva-fanaticism saturated revisionist history. As for the relevance of ethnicity on Misplaced Pages, Rama's Arrow has been using his bigotries against Pakistanis/Muslims as justification for his blocks against myself, and other users including NadirAli and ]. It's a bit late to lecture on leaving our personal identities at the door. Editors edit based on their personal biases, and admins administer on them. All this is obvious to anyone who compares Rama's treatment of Muslim Wikipedians with his treatment of Hindus where there's a conflict on the same articles and editors are guilty of the same violations. ] 04:17, 9 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| Let me atleast post on ] tommorrow and see what they say.--] | |||
| Looking at your user page, you should know all about being banned for 3RR. ] 00:19, 19 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::I have not violated 3RR. Please discuss in the talk page per my references. You have also removed newstoday, a reliable source. Are you saying that that is also not a reliable source? That is incredulous. What is a reliable Source to you? ] 00:29, 19 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::: These sources look like partisan rags. Cheap local newspapers can't be considered reliable. Amongst the rediff sources used are those where the authors name isn't mentioned. It seems to me rather than collecting information from solid sources, you are trying to promote your POV using anything that has ever been made into text regardless of factual integrity. 00:44, 19 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :::TIME magazine is a "partisan rag"? Heeee!!! How about "" and ? Also a partisan rag? Your rhetoric betrays your bias I'm afraid. ] 01:02, 19 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :::: What on earth are you talking about? Did I delete content citing Amnesty International? Use sources of high quality that people won't dispute, and get rid of low quality sources like "Rediff". ] 02:02, 19 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| Only you say they are low quality. Nobody else says so. ] 03:06, 19 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Image:Sector 4.jpg listed for deletion == | |||
| <div style="padding:5px; background-color:#E1F1DE;">'''Dear uploader:''' The media file you uploaded as ] has been listed for ] because you selected a copyright license type implying some type of restricted use, such as '''''for non-commercial use only''''', or '''''for educational use only''''' or '''''for use on Misplaced Pages by permission.''''' While it might seem reasonable to assume that such files can be freely used on Misplaced Pages, a non-profit website, . Please do not upload any more files with these restrictions on them, because content on Misplaced Pages needs to be compatible with the ], which allows anyone to use it for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial. | |||
| : Evidence that this block is a sham is on Blnguyen's talk page. The person I'm supposedly a sock puppet of in conversing with him over my block. How many people use two distinctly different Verizon accounts in apparently two different geographic location. There's absolutely nothing left to justify this block. ] 06:04, 9 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| '''If you ''created'' this media file''' and want to use it on Misplaced Pages, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license {{tl|GFDL-self}} to license it under the ], or {{tl|cc-by-sa-2.5}} to license it under the ] Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use {{tl|PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. | |||
| ::Huh, they're dynamic ones in the same region. ''']''' (]) 06:07, 9 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::: His is dynamic, as far as I can tell, mine is not. Are you sure they're of the same region? His IP looks considerably different from mine. I don't know much about deciphering IPs, but you need some evidence to support your assertion that his IP show's he's "within 8 miles" of me. ] 06:25, 9 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| I don't have any data. That's what the checkuser official told me. ''']''' (]) 06:26, 9 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::::I've spoken to Dmcdevit through e-mail, he basically said it was your call (ie the blocking admin) and all he was doing was giving information. Now you're dismissing your own judgement. You're the blocking admin, you made the call that I live within 8 miles of the location he's in. You made that presumption without ever seeing the actual numbers? You made the call that I am him. You can't back down now and put it on the guy who compared numbers. You took the opportunity to block me without reviewing whether the evidence against me was solid or not. You "assumed bad faith" and connected imaginary dots to conclude I am Bhaisaab. CheckUser said "Likely", in your mind you converted "Likely" into "Confirmed" and then blocked me. Go ahead and contact the CheckUser-capable admin and have him compare whether my ID's changed since I opened my account or since this block was put in place. Have him look at the IP on your talk page now. Don't pretend you're just some cog in the machinery, you're the blocking admin. Take responsibility for your fuck-ups. ] 06:37, 9 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :::::That's how Blnguyen operates. After he blocked me for saying Ahmadinejad is awesome to a "Jew" and later realized that Hkelkar is, in fact, Hindu he tried to make up other excuses and justifications for his block. ] 07:45, 9 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| Post your IP address. ] 06:30, 9 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :I have a fixed IP, I can e-mail it to an admin. I'm not sure I'd want to share it here...I've asked Dmcdevit to do an IP check right now. We're editing at the same time, so he can verify that all my edits have been from a distinctly different IP than yours. ] 06:37, 9 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| Ok well good luck with that. Be careful with Bakaman. He goes on long rants about "Hkelkar sockpuppet fantasies." He did the same thing during the arbcom case and ended up ] as usual. ] 06:44, 9 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| '''If you ''did not create'' this media file''' but want to use it on Misplaced Pages, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may choose one of the fair use tags from ] if you believe one of those ] rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and ]. | |||
| While I am not at liberty to reveal the specific IP evidence, I will say that MinaretDk's claims are false and "likely" indeed the correct result of the check. I'm protecting this page to prevent this abuse. ]·] 08:27, 9 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| If you have any questions please ask at ]. Thank you. {{{2|—<b><font color="#00FFFF">]</font>] (])</b> 22:10, 19 January 2007 (UTC)}}}</div><!-- Template:Idw-noncom --> | |||
| ==]== | |||
| == Personal Attack == | |||
| Hi, I'd like to draw your attention to ]. I have tried to address the concerns in earlier ] and checked the portal against ]. Based on this I think it is proper time to push for Featured Portal status for Bangladesh Portal, which will be an important milestone for WikiProject Bangladesh. But to achieve this I need help from you. Please participate in the on-going discussion on the ] and give me your valuable inputs.-] 03:51, 3 August 2007 (UTC) | |||
| Please refrain from calling people "Hindu Fundamentalists" as it is a personal attack. | |||
| {{{{{subst|}}}#if:{{{1|}}}|With regards to your comments on ]: }}Please see Misplaced Pages's ] policy. Comment on ''content'', not on contributors; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to ] for disruption. Please ] and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. <!-- Template:No personal attacks (npa2) --> ] 04:18, 20 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :I didn't say you're a Hindu fundementalist, I said you have their POV. That is not a personal attack, but an observation. Please invest more effort into not editing with such disregard for neutrality and factual accuracy. Please attempt to demonstrate less sympathy for Hindu extremism and their militant/terrorist actions. Please stop portraying the Hindu community in Bangladesh as being chronic victims of some imaginary atrocity. I'll refrain from using the phrase I used, regardless of how accurate it seems. ] 06:31, 20 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::Please ], of which your statements above are a violation. ] 22:09, 20 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| The same to you as well. I could just as easily say that, given the overwhelming references (BBC, Amnesty International) proving endemic persecution of Hindus in Bangladesh, that your attempts to whitewash it belie an Islamic Fundamentalist POV line those of ] or the BNP. ] 22:23, 20 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::You could just as easily say that, but then you'd be lying.I never deleted content citing BBC or Amnesty. There's nothing wrong with Jamaat i Islami. They explicitly state Hindus have a right to follow and enjoy their customs. Compare that to Baal Thakeray, who said Muslims shouldn't be allowed to pray in public view. ] 22:34, 20 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::In fact, Thackeray also said "We must accept the Muslims and make them a part of us". You should read Nobel Laureate VS Naipaul's books more. JI never said anything good about Hindus. They regard Hindus as subhuman infidels who should be massacred as per their false interpretation of the holy Qu'ran. ] 23:36, 20 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :::Finally, despite all of this conflict, Muslims in India are among the freest in the world to practice Shariat and the entire range of the Fiqh. We pay Hajj subsidies to Muslims in India. An Indian Muslim was one of two people in history to translate the holy Qu'ran properly into English (Yusuf Ali) and the President of India is a Muslim. No such equivalent thing has happened for Hindus in Bangladesh, who are being hunted down to extermination. ] 23:40, 20 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::::If I were some kind of "anti-Muslim Hindu" from the pages of ]'s propaganda leaflets, would I have made this suggestion to ] and expressed an interest in re-writing the article with historical instances of anti-Islam sentiments, or made these additions to ]? ] 23:59, 20 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Finally, in India, anti-Islam books like the "Calcutta Quran petition" are banned, whereas anti-Hindu hate literature disseminated by Lashkar-e-Toiba like "Hinduon ki Haqeeqat" is allowed to circulate freely. In Bangladesh, one Muslim woman, Taslima Nasrin, writes books critical of Islamic Fundamentalism and her books are banned and she gets death threats. ] 00:03, 21 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::This Rumpel thing is none other than HKelkar, under a ban of 1 year for disruption of almost the same set of articles.Now trying to evade the ban through some loopholes in technology.As you would see ]'s edits, he has a habit of raking up populist speak like the one's above.] 10:36, 21 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == OR == | |||
| Fine, I'll replace it with sourced, more pointed criticism. ] 03:55, 23 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :Fair enough. ] 04:27, 23 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == NPA == | |||
| Please stop. If you continue to make personal attacks on other people{{{{{subst|}}}#if:{{{1|}}}| as you did at ]}}, you will be ] for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Thank you. <!-- Template:Npa3 -->. Misplaced Pages is not a madrassa. ] 23:59, 29 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ==3RR== | |||
| ] | |||
| Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly{{{{{subst|}}}#if:{{{1|}}}|, as you are doing in ]}}. If you continue, you may be ] from editing Misplaced Pages. Note that the ] prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for ], even if they do not technically violate the ]. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you.<!-- Template:3RR -->--] 00:37, 30 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| Thanks for the warning. I'm on 3 edits. The other editor is deleting content that has rock solid sources, so his work is pretty much vandalism. All he's doing is basically presenting misinformation and propaganda. ] 00:40, 30 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| =="Rama's Arrow" block== | |||
| {{unblock reviewed|1=Admin offers no precise reason for his block. He blocked another Pakistani editor (I happen to be Bangladeshi, but am also critical of the pro-Indian POV in some of my edits) without a specific example of a violation, which has been widely criticized. Admin who blocked me has blocked another editor, and the circumstances of those blocks have been held as questionable as well. I am convinced that this admin makes it a habit to block people who present edits critical of Indian history, or content on Hinduism that might be considered critical. Therefore, he is corrupt. He is abusing his powers as an admin. I responded to attacks against me with far more civil language, and yet I am the one singled out.|decline=If you have a dispute, I strongly urge that you follow ] when your block expires. Continuing to engage in an edit war will not solve anything. -- ] 16:45, 30 January 2007 (UTC)}} | |||
| My edits include valid citations, the people i'm fighting against disregard NPOV, VS, etc. I avoid violating 3RR as best I can. Under the circumstances, given the habit of accusation and vandalism of the person I was in conflict adopts, and given this admins picking-and-choosing which violators he punishes, this block should be undone. | |||
| '''PLEASE SEE BELOW FOR MY ANI RESPONSE''' | |||
| Previous misuses of the block: | |||
| Lists enemy's POV as reasion for block: | |||
| Other users notice same thing that I do: | |||
| ] 01:50, 30 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == ANI report on your block == | |||
| Please see . ] 05:32, 30 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| I don't suppose you'd give me access to respond to the ANI allegation, or at least point viewers there to my response here? I would be grateful if anyone could post my response to the ANI on my behalf, since I'm temporarily paralyzed. | |||
| As I said before, I am a Bangladeshi, not a Pakistani. Anyone familiar with Bangladesh's history would understand why I'd not be particularly sympathetic on matters that generally trouble Pakistanis. I did edit on ] after finding the article was extremely biased, and Persection of Hindus to include the issue of caste discrimination. In both articles my edits were repeatedly deleted without reason, regardless of the fact that I was replacing ORIGINAL RESEARCH with texts citing appropriate sources (CNN, BBC, US Congress, etc). | |||
| Now to your justifications for this block. | |||
| One diff you give (130) points to me explaining why commented on Rumplestiltskin's page. There he accuses me of being a meatpuppet for the Pakistanis he has a rivalry with. I RESPONDED by pointing out he is in fact vandalizing (deleting large amounts of cited text without reason or explanation) on two pages I am editing, and my gripe with him is separate from his troubles with those Pakistanis. My comment that amounts to your diff 134 is precisely accurate, and the deletion of verifiable content with solid sources is vandalism and the resultant effect in the article is propaganda. This is a reasonable response, doesn't violate NPA, and therefore is a lousy justification for blocking me. | |||
| On your meatpuppet accusation (you're violating WP:AGF in spades, especially considering you're blocking based on your prejudices), Nadirali probably looked up your edit history and found your block on my account. He clearly agrees with me and added another example of your abusive blocks. I welcome his addition although I have never spoken to him before. I criticized an earlier block you placed on another editor, back when I had no familiarity with you or the editors you are fighting with, when I saw your reasons almost entirely consisted of your POV differences with his editing; he spoke in that same thread. He saw the same thing. We both agree you are abusing the block feature for your own POV purposes. I found that an ugly use of admin powers then, and I still do so now. Now that you blocked me for these same petty reasons, he probably takes an interest in that too. Those are legit reasons, where 'meatpuppetry' isn't a reason or excuse. I have had no communications with NadirAli outside of the ANI entry on Rumplestiltskin, whom I find to be a terribly disruptive presence on Misplaced Pages. I have no association with the editors editing on "History of Pakistan" outside of that. That isn't meatpuppetry, that's three people seeing the same thing for what it is. The meatpuppet allegation is false, and requires some serious ABF (assume bad faith) to make the block seem reasonable. | |||
| On warnings, Rumplestiltskin puts warnings on MANY editors pages without citing real personal attacks. I made no personal attack against him recently, certainly not today, despite the fact that he called me an Islamic fundementalist. He added that warning today without reason and I deleted it. I was within my rights to delete unwarranted warnings on my own talk page. I did not add a warning to his user page, but reverted the MANY edits he kept deleting which included a warning template placed by another editor. What I reverted included comments I and others made in regards to his edits, and that warning placed by another editor. Apparently Rumplestiltskin is in the habit of calling everyone an Islamic fascist or what not. Apparently many people get annoyed with those accusations. It is not permissible to delete a valid warning, so my reverting them less than 3 times was within acceptable norms. I had been talking to other admins on Rumplestiltskins contributions, and I wanted them to see the many people he was in conflict with. That was my reason for reverting his talk page. Once again, not a justification for a block. | |||
| "I request input and criticism from all. There were numerous attempts by me, user:Fowler&fowler, user:Nobleeagle to advise these users to keep calm and seek Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution, but they chose to start a vicious cycle of accusations, revert-warring and serious incivility. Rama's arrow 05:30, 30 January 2007 (UTC)"'' This is entirely false. No such communication has ever been made. I have no familiarity with any other conflict where such requests were made. My experience is limited to the three pages I edited. | |||
| On Rama's Arrow in general: His edit history shows he is in close communication with people pushing a biased pro-Hindu POV, including the very editor I am in conflict with. Rama blocks only those who oppose that bias, including me. I have no real problem with either Indians or Hindus, but in the two articles I edited, there is serious problems of propaganda-pushing. Yes, PROPAGANDA. Like "persecution of Hindus" suggesting Dalits opted for menial jobs rather than being forced into them. Like "Hinduism in Bangladesh" exclusively focusing on 'atrocities' to imply all Hindus do in Bangladesh is get persecuted (I have no objection to those allegations supported with verifiable sources". Rama uses the block as an editing tool, to block those people with views opposed to him. He does not apply that power uniformly, and turns a blind eye to violations of WP:SOAP, WP:NPOV, and WP:VS violated time and again by RumpleStiltSkin (clever ID, RSS) and his allies. ] 06:14, 30 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ---- | |||
| {{Quotation|Rama blocks only those who oppose that bias, including me.}} | |||
| Minaret, | |||
| , and I'm a Hindu and one who is often accused of "pushing an agenda." | |||
| <sub><span style="border:3px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">]|]</span></sub> 06:23, 30 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :: I know the going ons between this group of Indian editors.As precedent in ]'s sockpuppetry case they destroy, the Muslim and/or Pakistani users, even though they do not pose equivalent misbehaviour risk.As a result you can see that a recent sockpuppet of ] - is banned while ] comes back in flying colours and edits as ]...while ] got a one year block (for reporting Hkelkar}even though he was better behaved and had just one block before.You and Other Muslim or Pakistani,Bangladeshi,Iranian or Arab editors are doomed on Misplaced Pages.This is increasingly becoming a right wing Hindu propaganda tool] 22:16, 31 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Persecution == | |||
| I understand your POV but it's not Wikipolicy for your edits to stand in the way they are currently standing. Regards. ''' <font color="#000080">—</font> ]''' <sup></nowiki></font>]]</nowiki></font>]]</sup> 01:04, 4 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :: Not sure what you mean. I don't think your take on reality is actually logical or reasonable. Dismissing HRW because you think it's "anti-hindu"? How about the UN? What would you deem as "so credible that I can't blank it"? ] 01:06, 4 February 2007 (UTC)' | |||
| :::OK, I'll look into the devdasi question. ]] 01:29, 4 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :::: Thanks. ] 01:31, 4 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == blocked == | |||
| {{blocked|1 week}} | |||
| {{unblock reviewed|1=Admin who placed this block is already known to be a puppet for Hindu radicals here. I'm in the process of building my case against him and his usage of the block to push his agenda here. He has placed blocks on my account before, as well as those of others, on flimsy logic. Notice that the other editors in question have not been sanctioned accordingly, despite Bakasuprman's vile attack on Islam to which I responded, and Rumplestiltskin's vandalisms on the Persecution of Hindus page. Look at the edit history on Persecution of Hindus, consider the quality of my edits vs the blanking of huge amounts of texts by his friends. Look at Rumplestiltskin's talk page, he isn't being penalized for any violation he committed today, but merely has his block reset for sockpuppeting. Rama here has a personal stake in silencing editors here who oppose his POV.|decline=Personal attacks on the blocking admin very seldom result in an unblock. The rationale for your block, as ], is persuasive. -- ] 08:20, 4 February 2007 (UTC)}} | |||
| :Your block is due to your misconduct, incivility, personal attacks and edit-warring on ], ] and in light of . ] 05:05, 4 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| Most of my 'disruptive' edits to ] were me undoing acts of ], including those committed by your allies ] and ]. My edits to Rumplestiltskin/Hkelkar's page were limited to his allegations that I'm a supporter of Islamist radicalism. My comments regarding Bakasuprman were in response to this . Can I presume you'll appropriately deal with his expression of hate speech? Of course not. Given I've already made it clear you're a puppet for these Hindu fanatics, you shouldn't be issuing these blocks.] 05:15, 4 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 10:58, 16 February 2008
MinaretDk (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I have been falsely accused of being a sockpuppet of the user Bhaisaab. A Usercheck revealed a "likely" finding, which really only means I live in the same city as Bhaisaab and also use the same DSL service (which happens to be the most popular DSL service in the US). Editors I have previously been in conflict with know for a fact that I'm a Bangladeshi editor, whereas Bhaisaab is Pakistani/Iranian.
Decline reason:
Per Dmcdevit at the bottom of this page; this checkuser block is final, as noted by Dmcdevit's comment below and his protection of this talk page.
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
My account has been blocked as a 'sockpuppet' of "Bhaisaab". The Usercheck to justify this block suggests that I'm "likely" him, when actually all it proves is that I live in the same area as he does, and use the same DSL provider. The conclusion that I am a 'confirmed' sockpuppet of Bhaisaab is one that would require a considerable leap of 'bad faith', particularly given the editors I have been long in conflict against all know that I'm of a different ethnicity than Bhaisaab, and edit from a perspective altogether different from him. The admin "Rama's Arrow" has long been using his administrative powers to selectively block editors in a dispute by what side they argue from. He alleges my edits are "anti-Hindu" and "Pro-Islam", when nothing I've said or done has amounted to criticism of Hinduism as a religion, or promotion of Islam. I am not into theology, my interest in both articles was limited to history and the issue of human rights. He alleges my edits constitute 'disruption', when I am the only editor in those articles who follows WP policy in respect to WP:NPOV and WP:RS. He has used such differences of opinion as justification for blocks before. He's selectively silenced apparently Pakistani/Muslim editors, and placed exceptionally harsh extentions to their blocks when they strayed from his narrow road. His Hindutva activist friends however are inert, and in the very worst of cases he will restrict himself to advising them.
If an arbcom proceeding is needed for me to prove I'm not Bhaisaab, I'm willing to participate. Bhaisaab is supposedly a Pakistani or Iranian editor (I gather that from his talk page, etc), I'm a Bangladeshi. I can prove that, and my 'rivals' here are all aware of that. I have not edited articles on Pakistani history, which is Bhaisaab's forte. My involvment in editing Hindu-related articles stems entirely from my observing an extreme bias in the article Hinduism in Bangladesh. Any editor interested enough to dig deep and observe the conflict will see that the articles Persecution of Hindus and 2002 Gujarat Violence contain terribly biased content intentionally disfigured to present a skewed account of history.
Diffs pending.
MinaretDk 19:47, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
What the heck?How is it the evidence is clear that Rumps is Hkelkar,but no tag for him.This is so silly.No evidence.So everyone who edit wars with Rumps/Hkelkar is automatically a sock of Bhaisaab.So we have about half a dozen Muslim editors edit warring with Rumps/Hkelkar are they socks of Bhaisaab?--Nadirali نادرالی
- No, a technical report, Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/MinaretDk. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:57, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Apparently. Rumplestiltskin and Bakasuprman have violated every policy of Misplaced Pages, they've attacked editors and committed obvious acts of vandalism, but because the involved admins are sympathetic to their biases (ie fellow Indians/Wikiproject Hinduism members), those people are inert to administrative sanction. They get warnings after a career of attacks, Muslim editors get blocked without explicit reasons (eg Rama's Arrow THINKS your edits are disruptive or POV). Rama himself alleges I'm anti-Hindu/pro-Islam. Diffs please? Just because I don't take to Rumplystiltskin/Bakasuprman's rewriting of history to frame Muslims as deserving of the Gujarat Massacre, or I consider the treatment of untouchables in India as a form of persecution (the UN and HRW agree with me on that) as opposed to people who CHOSE their plight (the view Baka/Rumple are promoting) doesn't mean I'm anti-Hindu, and I've done nothing to suggest I'm pro-Islam. Does thinking that figures acknowleged by the US govt and human rights organizations deserves mention in the 2002 Gujarat Violence article constitute anti-Hindu bias? What's the definition of neutral then? Every admin I consulted on this ridiculous block against me has responded, most saying they're helpless to do anything and that it's up to the blocking admin. The blocking admin,User:Blnguyen, however chooses to ignore my e-mails and requests. Oh,he just happens to be another member of Project India.Is it a miracle that in a dispute involving content regarding recent Indian history, all the admins using force happen to be Indian, and a disproportionate degree of that force (all as far as I can see) is applied on those editors not promoting pro-Hindutva revisionism? Tell me again how Misplaced Pages is not supposed to be a battleground. MinaretDk 22:08, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- The checkuser happens to show very close geographic proximity (within 8km), same company, same IP stats, etc, and "likely" is merely statistical and not dependent on perceptions due to editing patterns. This is in addition to the editing patterns of having the same interest in Indian religious articles. BS self-identified as half Iranian-Pakistani, but he edited Indian stuff (hindu-muslim) and Middle East stuff (Islam-Israel, Ahmadinejad stuff). You were suspected because for a new user you show an extremely good command of all the wiki-legal procedures and how arbitration and checkuser works. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:57, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- As for the other stuff, being part of a WikiProject does not say anything about race or religion, so there's no need to brandish that here. Depite what a few people may think, I am neither Hindu nor Indian. A quick look at my userpage will show that my Indian article editing pertains to Indian cricketers and Buddhists. I have blocked you because it appears you are evading blocks, and have not made any content judgments or taken them into account. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:57, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- You are welcome to seek further opinions. I am not the person who could verify if you have Bengali ability, and if so, what to make of this, as I do not know how common it is amongst aubcontinental people to speak many languages. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:58, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- Misplaced Pages is full of retarded people. The least of those retards seem to get positions as administrators. If any one of them can understand Misplaced Pages policy in a month, I can do so in a week. I've been reading this website for a while now, long enough to know the basic ropes. I know about CheckUser because "Rama's Arrow" filed that request against me, and you subsequently posted that block template directing me to it on my user page. I know of Rumplestiltskin being Hkelkar's puppet from a comment left on my talk page, and then subsequent comments by a crowd of other editors. That Rumplestiltskin is the banned Hkelkar is Misplaced Pages's worst kept secret. How long does it take to read a page and figure out what "CheckUser" might mean? Someone else did the check, how do you verify that the person is within 8 miles of my location? Do you know how many Muslims live in New York city? How many of them use Verizon DSL? If your block is grounded on statistics alone, the "Likely" result of CheckUser doesn't CONFIRM anything, merely indicates closeness of two IP users. To draw the conclusion that two people geographically located in the roughly the same area are the same person, you'd need to use their editing habits as evidence. Bhaisaab is Iranian (not Pakistani as I thought) and his edit history shows interests in Islam-related and Iranian-related articles. I'm a Bangladeshi, and my edit history shows that too, along with some sympathy for the 2000 or so Muslims killed by Hindu fanatics in Gujarat, and criticism for Hindutva-fanaticism saturated revisionist history. As for the relevance of ethnicity on Misplaced Pages, Rama's Arrow has been using his bigotries against Pakistanis/Muslims as justification for his blocks against myself, and other users including NadirAli and User:unre4L. It's a bit late to lecture on leaving our personal identities at the door. Editors edit based on their personal biases, and admins administer on them. All this is obvious to anyone who compares Rama's treatment of Muslim Wikipedians with his treatment of Hindus where there's a conflict on the same articles and editors are guilty of the same violations. MinaretDk 04:17, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Let me atleast post on WP:ANI tommorrow and see what they say.--Nadirali نادرالی
- Evidence that this block is a sham is on Blnguyen's talk page. The person I'm supposedly a sock puppet of in conversing with him over my block. How many people use two distinctly different Verizon accounts in apparently two different geographic location. There's absolutely nothing left to justify this block. MinaretDk 06:04, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- Huh, they're dynamic ones in the same region. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:07, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- His is dynamic, as far as I can tell, mine is not. Are you sure they're of the same region? His IP looks considerably different from mine. I don't know much about deciphering IPs, but you need some evidence to support your assertion that his IP show's he's "within 8 miles" of me. MinaretDk 06:25, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- Huh, they're dynamic ones in the same region. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:07, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
I don't have any data. That's what the checkuser official told me. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:26, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- I've spoken to Dmcdevit through e-mail, he basically said it was your call (ie the blocking admin) and all he was doing was giving information. Now you're dismissing your own judgement. You're the blocking admin, you made the call that I live within 8 miles of the location he's in. You made that presumption without ever seeing the actual numbers? You made the call that I am him. You can't back down now and put it on the guy who compared numbers. You took the opportunity to block me without reviewing whether the evidence against me was solid or not. You "assumed bad faith" and connected imaginary dots to conclude I am Bhaisaab. CheckUser said "Likely", in your mind you converted "Likely" into "Confirmed" and then blocked me. Go ahead and contact the CheckUser-capable admin and have him compare whether my ID's changed since I opened my account or since this block was put in place. Have him look at the IP on your talk page now. Don't pretend you're just some cog in the machinery, you're the blocking admin. Take responsibility for your fuck-ups. MinaretDk 06:37, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- That's how Blnguyen operates. After he blocked me for saying Ahmadinejad is awesome to a "Jew" and later realized that Hkelkar is, in fact, Hindu he tried to make up other excuses and justifications for his block. 72.88.143.139 07:45, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- I've spoken to Dmcdevit through e-mail, he basically said it was your call (ie the blocking admin) and all he was doing was giving information. Now you're dismissing your own judgement. You're the blocking admin, you made the call that I live within 8 miles of the location he's in. You made that presumption without ever seeing the actual numbers? You made the call that I am him. You can't back down now and put it on the guy who compared numbers. You took the opportunity to block me without reviewing whether the evidence against me was solid or not. You "assumed bad faith" and connected imaginary dots to conclude I am Bhaisaab. CheckUser said "Likely", in your mind you converted "Likely" into "Confirmed" and then blocked me. Go ahead and contact the CheckUser-capable admin and have him compare whether my ID's changed since I opened my account or since this block was put in place. Have him look at the IP on your talk page now. Don't pretend you're just some cog in the machinery, you're the blocking admin. Take responsibility for your fuck-ups. MinaretDk 06:37, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Post your IP address. 72.88.144.96 06:30, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- I have a fixed IP, I can e-mail it to an admin. I'm not sure I'd want to share it here...I've asked Dmcdevit to do an IP check right now. We're editing at the same time, so he can verify that all my edits have been from a distinctly different IP than yours. MinaretDk 06:37, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Ok well good luck with that. Be careful with Bakaman. He goes on long rants about "Hkelkar sockpuppet fantasies." He did the same thing during the arbcom case and ended up embarassed as usual. 72.88.144.96 06:44, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
While I am not at liberty to reveal the specific IP evidence, I will say that MinaretDk's claims are false and "likely" indeed the correct result of the check. I'm protecting this page to prevent this abuse. Dmcdevit·t 08:27, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Bangladesh portal
Hi, I'd like to draw your attention to Bangladesh portal. I have tried to address the concerns in earlier peer review and checked the portal against Featured portal criteria. Based on this I think it is proper time to push for Featured Portal status for Bangladesh Portal, which will be an important milestone for WikiProject Bangladesh. But to achieve this I need help from you. Please participate in the on-going discussion on the talk page and give me your valuable inputs.-Arman Aziz 03:51, 3 August 2007 (UTC)