Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 14:45, 21 February 2018

abusing administrator powers

I am posting on behalf of the Muslim community. We are sorry that this report was not more timely, but we had to sift through a lot of evidence and then agree on action. I have raised this matter before - I attempted to bring it up on ANI but was twice reverted (at 14:45 and 14:47, 14 January) by friends of NeilN. The problem is that NeilN inserts material derogatory of our religion in articles which are locked to prevent the bias being removed. We circulated a petition about the misuse of Misplaced Pages for this purpose which garnered 400,000 signatures. The threshold for a mandatory debate in Parliament is 100,000 signatures - if we pursue this option Misplaced Pages is likely to be banned in Muslim countries and Members may summon him to explain himself. The adverse publicity will be immense. A debate was started at the Reference desk but was censored by Nil Einne, a Malaysian who is presumably of the Chinese rather than the Muslim faith and admitted he was acting on behalf of NeilN.

The modus operandi is, whenever criticised, to remove the complaint and then block the OP alleging that (s)he is someone called Vote (X) for Change, an account which made two edits to one article (nothing to do with Islam) eight years ago. The matter is never referred to SPI for examination by an uninvolved administrator and no reasoning is ever given. When uninvolved administrators become aware of the claim they don't block (see 78.146.217.2). We have noticed that NeilN has a preoccupation with sex, not just in Islam-related articles but everywhere. Some examples are here: Warning:some of the images which come up on these diffs are not very nice, but we can't do anything about that. , , , , , , (I must say I'm learning some amazing new things here), ), , (hides his technical incompetence by removing criticism with a deceptive edit summary), , (wow!), , (and 18 minutes later this: ), (expressing Community consensus, methinks), , , . I make no comment on this , (or this, come to that) . He had a chance to provide some reasoning here but declined, settling for a display of incompetence instead ; (wowww!), (very patronising), (very apt), , (now I'm confused), , . Here the OP says the alleged sockpuppet is "in England", which is enough for NeilN to block without comment 26 minutes later. He doesn't seem to have many female fans, judging by this comment from Jessica Palantra: Special:Permalink/815641694#Butthead Barnstar. He accuses an editor of being "Vote (X) for Change" here ; , followed 14 minutes later by . It appears that when he claims editors are sockpuppets of "Vote (X) for Change" other administrators are quick to distance themselves from the allegations Special:Permalink/822282586#Administrator Abuse by Users Mandruss and NeilN, but that didn't deter him from blocking twelve minutes later.

NeilN repeated his claim that I am "Vote (X) for Change" only 24 hours ago:

...and the evidence presented above is pretty classic VXfC (all smoke, no fire). I can't definitively say there's a connection but it's something worth investigating. --NeilN 16:34, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

The proverb actually runs "There's no smoke without fire". Recently at an AN discussion an editor suggested a complaint against him be resolved by blocking him indefinitely, with right of appeal after six months. Within a few minutes the Community had done exactly that. NeilN wants KrampusC to be checkusered to confirm that he is "Vote (X) for Change". We respectfully suggest that the Committee give him his wish. Should the report come back negative we respectfully request that he be de-sysopped on the ground that he is too incompetent to have continued access to the tools. Thank you for your consideration. 78.146.210.173 (talk) 17:48, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

For the avoidance of doubt, the Committee's official ruling is here:

*I would have thought that it would have been better for someone to ask the clerks to take the action rather you and Bugs to delete someone else's evidence. It's particularly questionable of Bugs to remove something that doesn't show him in a particularly good light as it looks like he's trying to hide something. I'm sure that's not the case, but next time either let the IP's words alone (there is nothing that stops IPs from posting here) or ask a clerk to take action.

- SchroCat 07:22, 9 September 2016

This has been discussed already between Bugs and myself and as far as im aware we are in agreement on how to proceed should evidence not within the scope or supported is presented.

- Amortias 07:30, 9 September 2016

The formal notice may be inspected here: . It's in the form of a diff because Baseball Bugs has deleted the notice from his archive. If you're wondering why he deletes sections from his archive that's just the way he works. 78.145.17.144 (talk) 15:22, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

@Ymblanter: Having just this minute become aware of recent events, all I can say is "Don't let them get you down!" 81.151.100.245 (talk) 14:41, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 February 2018

This edit request to Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I started editing at the french wikipedia, at the psychology project as I am psychoanalyst, PhD, university teachning, and have scientific responsabilities at a very high international level. The psychology team of the WikiPedia.fr is hold by Pierrette13, and two other psychologists Cathroterdam (experimental) and Bruynek (auto-declared psychoanalyst). They didn't like my arrival and I was new and didn't kno at this moment how to edit, they started treating me agressively, every time I tried to contribute I was forced out, two request at the administers were sold out by my blocking, and now again they are forcing a global block.

During all previous attempts to discuss and explane myself my diff wasn't take into account. It is troue that when they agress me I am pointing out. For exemple they errased my page  yelling on my and making fun etc, etc. They are following me and interfere to my editing, and then they pretend that I am following them. Could you check the history ? I will be willing to send  you more details and diffs, but honestly I am not sure any more that someone could examine my request.Could you help me please? --Marloen (talk) 21:07, 4 February 2018 (UTC) Marloen (talk) 21:07, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: The English Misplaced Pages has no control over anything that happens on the French Misplaced Pages pages, you would need to raise this in the appropriate venue there. Amortias (T)(C) 21:12, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Dates on 2018 Motions

The motions in the 2018 section appear to have 2017 dates. I think the dates are wrong, not the header. Alternatively, I could have completely misunderstood as a new editor. Thank you, GreyGreenWhy (talk) 16:39, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

That is, in the motions archive, seeing this is a central talk page. Thanks, GreyGreenWhy (talk) 16:41, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

That is, the four entries in the motion table for 2018 should have '2017' replaced by '2018' in the 'Date enacted' column. EdJohnston (talk) 16:48, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Surely mere mortals can change this instead of asking clerks to do it? Right? I've fixed it. Thanks, User:GreyGreenWhy. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:55, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks both. GreyGreenWhy (talk) 17:09, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Aliases for arbitration cases

Following up on the discussion at Misplaced Pages talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard/Archive 36#Community feedback: Proposal on case naming, I created a proof-of-concept template to create aliases for the cases opened in 2017 and 2018. Thus the following wiki markup will result in the following:

Module:Sandbox/isaacl/ArbCaseAlias/data contains the lookup table that needs to be kept up to date. So if anyone is eager to start using their own preferred labelling scheme now, it can be done. As an optimization, with this implementation, all of the aliases need to have a common prefix format, such as year. This could be made more flexible, but at the cost of having to search through every single case alias for a match. isaacl (talk) 05:25, 20 February 2018 (UTC)