Misplaced Pages

User talk:Kirill Lokshin: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 14:00, 3 May 2013 editAm Not New (talk | contribs)236 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit Revision as of 16:42, 3 May 2013 edit undoMiszaBot III (talk | contribs)597,462 editsm Robot: Archiving 2 threads (older than 5d) to User talk:Kirill Lokshin/Archive 14.Next edit →
Line 11: Line 11:
|archive = User talk:Kirill Lokshin/Archive %(counter)d |archive = User talk:Kirill Lokshin/Archive %(counter)d
}}<!-- Please do not modify the section above --> }}<!-- Please do not modify the section above -->

== Doubts about the ArbCom case ==

Kirill, since the Arbitration case was accepted I've had growing doubts. I asked the ArbCom to accept the case on the basis of whether or not is acceptable that editors write articles using Fascist authors and pushing the political views of these same authors. The other party's statements were used to bring diffs against me, not to respond about their acts. You are well aware that I always complained that I considered unfair that I had only a total of 3,000 words to discuss the actions of two editors while they had a total of 6,000 words to talk about me and only me. Even with greater advantage that did not prevent Cambalachero from using sources (which can be read on Google books) and misrepresenting what they actually said. I warned about this on the Evidence page talk page and nothing was done about it. MarshalN20 used quotations out of context and I also warned about it.

Not only that, but two editors (Dentren and Andrés Djordjalian) appeared out of nowhere to write statements about the case. I never saw them before and they were never in any of the previous discussions regarding the subject. What I do know is that they are MarshalN20's friends. Now Wee Curry Monster also appeared (he is also a friend of Cambalachero and MarshalN20). He did not participate in any of the previous discussions since I opened a thread on Juan Manuel de Rosas in December 2012. He says that he is not part of any group related to Cambalachero and MarshalN20, but they are well known friends. In fact, I warned Cambalachero back in January that Wee Curry Monter should not appear out of nowhere. Take Astynax as an example: he and I are long partners and we wrote several articles together. He has made comments here and there about this case, either on Rosas' talk page or even here on the Arbitration. But he expressed himself solely regarding the use of Fascist sources, and not over MarshalN20 and Cambalachero's behavior toward other editors.

How can I defend myself? My statement was about their edits on articles. They changed the focus of the case toward me over how I deal with other users. Cambalachero has misrepresented sources in his very statement and MarshalN20 took diffs out of context and gave them a whole different meaning. I have no other explanation to their three friends' appearance if not for obvious canvassing. The last three editors who wrote statements did not respect the time limit (12 April). Thus it mean that the time limit is not being enforced? How can the ArbCom be aware of editors who misrepresent sources in an Arbitration case? And what can I do about their accusations against me? Will I be given a chance to defend myself later? --] (]) 20:14, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

:Arbitration proceedings examine the behavior of ''all'' parties equally; the fact that you requested arbitration based on a particular allegation regarding Cambalachero and MarshalN20 in no way limits the scope of the actual case. More to the point, your assertion that the other parties are pushing Fascist political views is merely that—an assertion. You seem to be under the impression that the Arbitration Committee will simply accept whatever assertions you make as facts; that is not the case, and it's quite possible that the case will conclude with the other parties' assertions about the situation accepted as facts instead. ]&nbsp;<sup>]]</sup> 23:19, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

::I'm not assuming. I can only be sure of what I think, not of what others think, including Arbitrators. I am truly confused because I'm unaware of how the Arbitration works. Does it means that I won't have an opportunity to respond to what they said about me? --] (]) 00:09, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello. I would like to point that Lecen has provided no proof for those accusations. I have no special relation or influence over the other users, who act on their own. For instance, Wee Curry Monster. I do not need to prove that I do not influence what does he do or stops doing: Lecen has already done that for me. See the "Justin" user in Lecen's evidence page, that Lecen cited discussing with me? , who renamed his account in 2010. And, as I pointed in my own evidence page, this is not the first time Lecen makes this type of gratuitous accusations. ] (]) 13:41, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

:Dear Kirill,
:I just read the messages above. I would just like to add that I have not canvassed anyone for their opinion.
:Neither Andrés Djordjalian nor Wee Curry Monster are friends of mine. I barely have ever interacted with Andrés, so there is not much I can say about him other than that he seems like a good person. I know Wee Curry Monster from the ] article, but our "relationship" has been one filled with severe disagreements about content. Nonetheless, we have always kept our disagreements solely on content; outside that, our interactions as editors has been one of mutual respect.
:However, Dentren is indeed a ''Wikifriend'' of mine. I have known him throughout nearly all of the years I have edited at Misplaced Pages. My first few years at Misplaced Pages had a rough start (I was cocky, rude, and uncaring), but Dentren helped me reform by leading through example. I did not ask him to provide any comments about me, but his comment (and concern) continues to show me his quality as a human being.
:Best regards.--] | ] 21:01, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

== ''The Signpost'': 15 April 2013 ==

<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
{{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2013-04-15}}
</div><!--Volume 9, Issue 15-->
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
* ''']'''
* ]
* ]
* ] (]) 20:09, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0503 -->


== ''The Bugle'': Issue LXXXV, April 2013 == == ''The Bugle'': Issue LXXXV, April 2013 ==

Revision as of 16:42, 3 May 2013

Please sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~) and add comments on a new topic in a new section. I will respond on this talk page unless you request otherwise. Questions, requests, criticism, and any other comments are always welcome!

I am an administrator open to recall. To request this, please start a request for comment; if the consensus there is that my conduct has been unbecoming of an administrator, I will resign.


Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20


This page has archives. Sections older than 5 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

The Bugle: Issue LXXXV, April 2013

Full front page of The Bugle Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:04, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

note

hi. I have left a note for Arbcomm, at this page. just a suggestion. just letting you know. feel free to comment if you wish. thanks. --Steve, Sm8900 (talk) 21:00, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 April 2013

The Signpost: 29 April 2013

hey can you check this page its important.

please check relations of am not new with child star.

listion the ip of child star is 182.188.190.59 taken from its investigation page and my ip is 119.154.4.48.there is absolute no relation between range.the only relation which is visible is relation between location internet service provider and location.and it is because there is only one ISP in Pakistan that is PTCL.i request another clerks to please check my relation again.Dil e Muslim talk 06:27, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

please i request you to see "am not new" and child star relation once again.please its importantDil e Muslim talk 14:00, 3 May 2013 (UTC)