Misplaced Pages

Latest revision as of 02:45, 20 February 2023

Archives

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

My Story

I see a sockpuppet. The sockpuppeteer states he's Hindu. The sockpuppet claims to be Jewish. I don't assume good faith of the sockpuppet for three months (because policy does not require me to extend the courtesy) while, at the same time, the admins are oblivious to the fact. Arbcom decides that I had been right about the sockpuppetry. The sockpuppet is banned. I am banned for my behavior while having assumed bad faith. That behavior includes "being anti-Semitic" (or as I would say it, defending my country's President) to a sockpuppeteer who Blnguyen now knows is actually a Hindu. Admins are all off the hook for their failure to see what a normal user could see for three months. Can anyone tell me if this would have happened if the admins knew, like I knew, that I was speaking with a Hindu and why Iranians can't praise their President? BhaiSaab 17:19, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

That's the tip of the iceberg of your disruptive editing. Arrow740 21:41, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

And of course, a member of the "anti-Muslim brigade" replies first. BhaiSaab 01:57, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

That entire case was a lot more than a case of sockpuppetry and assumptions of bad faith against a possible sockpuppet. Nobleeagle 06:20, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

In case you don't know (but I think you know it), BhaiSaab is even not allowed to edit his talk page to reply you. So your last comments about the case are unnecessary caustic, mean, and not very... noble. TwoHorned 20:14, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

My comment did not need reply, I think we can all agree that it wasn't a case of finding a sockpuppet and getting rid of him? So I cannot imagine that BhaiSaab would disagree with me on that point, if you believe he will then delete my last two comments and please explain why on my talk page. Nobleeagle 04:53, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

That case was about sockpuppetry and disruption. Sockpuppetry was a part of it, and it was used for disruption. We all know that. TwoHorned 16:01, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

NinaEliza 17:23, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Goodbye

See you BhaiSaab! (→Netscott) 16:43, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Sounds good... hopefully we'll both be around. I suspect you may "pop" up in the meantime though... lol! Take it easy. (→Netscott) 16:47, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration/Hkelkar

This case is now closed and the results have been posted above.

• BhaiSaab (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is banned for one year.
• Hkelkar (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) editing under any name or anonymous ip is banned from Misplaced Pages for one year.
• TerryJ-Ho (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is banned for a year for personal attacks, disruptive comments, edit-warring and incivility.
• BhaiSaab is placed on probation for an indefinite period. He may be banned from any article or set of articles which he disrupts. All bans to be logged at Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration/Hkelkar#Log_of_blocks_and_bans.
• Hkelkar and socks is placed on probation for an indefinite period. He may be banned from any article or set of articles which he disrupts. All bans to be logged at Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration/Hkelkar#Log_of_blocks_and_bans.
• TerryJ-Ho is placed on probation for an indefinite period. He may be banned from any article or set of articles which he disrupts. All bans to be logged at Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration/Hkelkar#Log_of_blocks_and_bans.

For the Arbitration committee, Cowman109 06:02, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

My only sockpuppet is him. If you attempt to do some sort of defamation by labeling every user from my uni as a sockpuppet of mine, I'll be sure to have some fun around here. BhaiSaab 01:46, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to see you go

It was nice to have an Iranian voice on the wikipedia. Hope to see you back. Don't screw up your time-limited ban by sockpuppetry; a year ain't that long. -- Kendrick7 05:02, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Muhammad/Mediation

Just to notify that mediation has renewed at the Muhammad article, after a delay due to Ars Scriptor's leaving, in case you still wanted to participate. I'll be the mediator, but I may call in help from someone more experienced later. | AndonicO 13:31, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Temporary Unblock

BhaiSaab (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I would like to be temporarily unblocked so that I may comment here. If that is not possible, I ask that someone simply relay a message which I will post on my talk page. Thanks.

Decline reason:

You can comment in the section below and it will appear on WP:CN#BhaiSaab.27s_commentary. — _InBC 18:16, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

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.

BhaiSaab, I'm going to respond to you on WP:CN so be sure to watchlist that page so that you can be aware of my responses and those of others. Thanks. (→Netscott) 20:41, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment here BhaiSaab

First off, I would just like to say that I found the arbcom results a little surprising. I spent about two months tango-ing with Hkelkar and trying to expose his lies. I admit that I went a little too far and found personal details (by a Google search) and took too much into my own hands when trying to verify his identity, but I just wanted to make sure that I was not falsely accusing him. My main problem with that user was that I knew he was User:Shiva's Trident, something he had been denying for a long time, and in the same arbitration page we see acknowledgment that I and other users were right all that time when admins like Blnguyen chose to ignore the situation, while at the same time banning these users who knew what Hkelkar was up to. Alright, I guess it makes a little sense to give me a prolonged ban, but why ban someone like TerryJ-Ho, who had no previous record of blocks and simply got into a few tiffs with a trouble-maker, Hkelkar? There is something seriously wrong with the arbcom decisions in this case. On the same day of his banning, Hkelkar began actively editing with an alternate account, which he used until Feb. 10 (and after which, began using other accounts of course). He has currently taken to possibly using dozens of throwaway accounts (many of which are probably listed here). Also I wanted to comment my ban resets. The first was done because of a checkuser which later proved to be incorrect, as did the third. As usual, Blnguyen did not admit his mistake in identifying the socks. If you want to use my "3 ban resets" against me, at least get your facts straight. I don't particularly care whether or not I'm indefinitely banned. This entire discussion is just lip service to an ineffective solution. Instead of going after the root of the problem, Hkelkar, you're going after whoever Hkelkar seems to cross during his POV-pushing routine. I thank Netscott for defending but I would also suggest to him that he not waste his time. BhaiSaab 20:10, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, I think H.E. was an always-personal-attack-maker. I didn't follow Hkelkar's conflict with BhaiSaab and don't know what exactly happened there. But as far as I know, BhaiSaab was by no means like H.E. His excellency was moving around throwing insults and I am happy for his block. --Aminz 20:30, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Award

		The Editor's Barnstar
		Thanks for your great efforts in Islam article which led to making a FA article. --Sa.vakilian(t-c) --03:03, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Bashir_najafi.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Bashir_najafi.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Misplaced Pages articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MER-C 11:41, 22 July 2007 (UTC)