This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Sandstein (talk | contribs) at 16:31, 13 May 2010 (→Nipsonanomhmata: sanctioned). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 16:31, 13 May 2010 by Sandstein (talk | contribs) (→Nipsonanomhmata: sanctioned)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Noticeboards | |
---|---|
Misplaced Pages's centralized discussion, request, and help venues. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the dashboard. For a related set of forums which do not function as noticeboards see formal review processes. | |
General | |
Articles and content | |
Page handling | |
User conduct | |
Other | |
Category:Misplaced Pages noticeboards |
Click here to add a new enforcement request
For appeals: create a new section and use the template {{Arbitration enforcement appeal}}
See also: Logged AE sanctions
Important informationShortcuts
Please use this page only to:
For all other problems, including content disagreements or the enforcement of community-imposed sanctions, please use the other fora described in the dispute resolution process. To appeal Arbitration Committee decisions, please use the clarification and amendment noticeboard. Only autoconfirmed users may file enforcement requests here; requests filed by IPs or accounts less than four days old or with less than 10 edits will be removed. All users are welcome to comment on requests except where doing so would violate an active restriction (such as an extended-confirmed restriction). If you make an enforcement request or comment on a request, your own conduct may be examined as well, and you may be sanctioned for it. Enforcement requests and statements in response to them may not exceed 500 words and 20 diffs, except by permission of a reviewing administrator. (Word Count Tool) Statements must be made in separate sections. Non-compliant contributions may be removed or shortened by administrators. Disruptive contributions such as personal attacks, or groundless or vexatious complaints, may result in blocks or other sanctions. To make an enforcement request, click on the link above this box and supply all required information. Incomplete requests may be ignored. Requests reporting diffs older than one week may be declined as stale. To appeal a contentious topic restriction or other enforcement decision, please create a new section and use the template {{Arbitration enforcement appeal}}.
|
Supreme Deliciousness
Supreme Deliciousness topic banned for thirty days by Tznkai |
---|
Request concerning Supreme Deliciousness
Sanction or remedy that this user violatedARBPIA (June 2009)
SD has a long history of tenatious editing and trying to remove Israeli content or de-emphasize Israeli & Jewish content: His userpage, now deleted, at one point declared strong Anti-Israeli views and belief that Israel should not exist. History of trying to politicize non-political articlesSD was warned and notified of the ARBCOM sanctions on June 27, 2009. These are instances occurring after that date.
Dismisses sources based upon the fact they are from Israel or are written by Israelis and/or Jews.
Advice to other editorsSuggests to other editors that they should undertake “doublespeak” to achieve results that may not be supported by consensus. Tells other editors that they should not “always say what you truly believe, try to reach your goals in another way.” (November 2009) Skirting CfDsTries to skirt CfDs by creating new categories very similar to the one being discussed: and (March - April 2010) Games the systemSD has repeatedly tried to change the names of Mountains in the Golan Heights from Hebrew to Arabic, trying different ways. The first time he wanted to change the names an RfC was opened on the Golan Heights talk page (November 2009). When consensus failed there, he then tried at the individual mountains 1). (February 2010) 2) (March 2010) When there was no consensus for change on the individual mountains, this article was created (which I suggested, to condense small unsourced articles) but now it appears it will be used as a vehicle to attempt to change the mountain names again. (April 2010) Politicizes non political talk pagesSupreme Deliciousness decided to re-arrange the long-standing Wikiproject listing order in several articles because of his belief that "Syria" should come before Israel on the article talk page and . (April 2010) Arbcom situationsSD’s Anti-Israeli behavior has even come up in unrelated Arbcom cases (October - November 2009)
Ban on articles pertaining to Israel or Jewish content. The length of such ban, being permanent or short term is up to the admin. However I would ask the Admin to keep in mind that SD’s anti-Israeli editing has been a long term problem, but most of the time he has managed to push the envelope just enough so that he flies under the radar. The majority of his edit history is related to trying to de-emphasize or remove Israeli content from articles, with very little in way of actual article expansion or creation.
SD often edits in cooperation with another user, User:Ani medjool, whom I will also be filing a AE case on.
Discussion concerning UserStatement by User:TiamutThere is no problem with a user being anti-Israeli or anti-Palestinian (there are many here of both kinds and we edit alongside each other without huge problems everyday). Its not people's views that are problematic, but their behaviours, if disruptive. I don't see anything disruptive in the work SD did on Mountains in the Golan Heights. I do think its quite silly to edit war over the placement of Syria and Israel wikiprojects (but as there are others edit-warring over this, I don't see why SD should be subject to a topic ban for it). I don't think SD meant to game the system with the category she created, but I can see why it might be interpreted that way. I also don't see how the advice she gae to other users is problematic. We shouldn't all say exactly what we believe here when its not related to article editing - that's called WP:SOAP. I do agree that User:Ani medjool is a highly problematic user (and look forward to seeing the AE report Nsaum75 is going to file on that user, who has serially disrupted the I-P arena for some time now without any serious repurcussions). But I don't think the same is true of SD. She has made some good contributions to this encyclopedia. She's certainly not perfect and sometimes wastes her time on silly or unproductive things, and maybe even soapboxes a little from time to time (no more or less than others), but she generally responds to constructive criticism and has not done anything to undermine the goals of the encylopedia, in my opinion. An NPOV encyclopedia is written by people of all POVs, some of whom may have POVs vastly different than our own. That's not a reason to topic ban them. Yes, its hard to work to bridge such gaps in perspectives, but much better to try, than to eliminate those we deem too far gone. Particularly when they are trying to hear what others are saying to them. Tiamut 15:14, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
"She"? I'm a man. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 17:03, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
If it is me, then what is this: and who is the one edit warring against consensus? Why haven't you brought this up? And what is "circumvents three-related RfC" what was decided during those RfCs? --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 17:52, 30 April 2010 (UTC) Statement by Plot SpoilerSupreme exhibits over the top WP:Battleground behavior and the evidence presented shows that Supreme is incapable of WP:NPOV edits when it comes to I/P articles. Creating WP:Soap articles like "Israeli theft of Arab cuisine" and that Israeli has hijacked everything else in Arab culture (hookah, falafel, etc.), regardless of the fact that over 50% of Israel's population is composed of Jews of Middle Eastern origin. Supreme has long exhibited this POV and uncivil behavior and methinks it's time for a topic ban. Seriously. Plot Spoiler (talk) 15:44, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Statement by Supreme DeliciousnessWhat is the sanction or remedy that I have violated? Many of the comments he have brought up and things I have done are comments and things from a long time ago. At the Hookah talkpage, how do you explain this edit IP just removed the word "Palestine" and replaced it with "Israel". Nsaum75 claims that "properly sourced information about Israel and Hummus".. It was about an Israeli guy without any kind of scientific research to back him up, was making up his own mind about what the bible said, basically re-writing the bible and drawing his own conclusion from it. And based on this they wanted to ad to the article that Hummus Is Israeli. And Nsaum75 calls this "properly sourced information about Israel and Hummus". At the falafel article, Nsaum75 kept on adding several Israeli pictures into the article, that is not neutral. If there is anyone that should be sanctioned, its him for keeping on adding exclusively Israeli pictures in as many articles as he can, he show a strong pro-Israel pushing views, this is not neutral. Many of these things he have brought up are content disputes where he or others have an Israeli pov and I a neutral worldview. I am not edit warring at any of these articles and I always talk at the talkpage. About the "Dismisses sources based upon the fact they are from Israel or are written by Israelis and/or Jews." Yes I said they were unreliable for setting the standardized name in English for several reasons, they would of course use the Israeli name: Some of these Israeli sources have for example been written by the Chairman of the Israeli Golan Lobby and Ariel Encyclopedia speaks about Golan as if it was a part of Israel. And several others including an admin have dismissed Israeli sources for setting the standardized name in English by just the fact that they are from Israel: "Advice to other editors" Ani Medjool had very strong language, and what I meant about that was that he might get banned if he continues, just like if pro-israeli editors hated Palestinians, but they cant show it cause they would get banned, so I told him that if he feel the way he feels he should be quiet about it. For the sake of the encyclopedia, to avoid unnecessary drama. "Skirting CfDs" This was never "skirting", it was a different category, and I accepted the deletion of it as the majority of people wanted it gone. "Politicizes non political talk pages" How is it neutral to have the Israeli tag first about an area that is by all countries on earth recognized as part of Syria? And how many edits at each article did I do this? 1 time. "Games the system" This is completely BS, if you look at all the neutral comments and sources, you can see that there was greater support for the standardized arabic names, not hebrew, look at the uninvolved comments, how many of these support the hebrew?
Almost all the sources brought up for the Arabic were English, while almost all of them brought up for the hebrew were Israeli and some of them implied Golan as part of Israel, and also an article from the "Jewish Virtual Libray" that was sourced from Misplaced Pages. And the israeli side just said "no" to the change, so this is how there was no move of the articles. Am I not allowed to open a new RfC now? The reason why the article Mountains in the Golan Heights is locked down now is because user Breein edit warred his own pov into the article, the names right now are hebrew first, because there was allegedly "No consensus" for the change, yet Brein changed the position of the translation to put the hebrew first without any kind of consensus, and its interesting that Nsaum75 do not mention this. Nsaum also claims that "SD's true intent may be to force name changes".. no it is not and I told malik this on his talkpage that I myself had changed to the hebrew first and that I would not change it to the standardized Arabic as the discussion is now: "SD often edits in cooperation" This is a completely baseless attack against me, I edit by myself and with no one else.
Statement by Malik ShabazzIn the interest of brevity I will make only two comments. 1) This week Supreme Deliciousness twice felt the need to rearrange WikiProject banners so Syria came before Israel, in one case participating in a revert war (although he himself made only one revert). 2) The above characterization of photos as Israeli is typical. Because of the WP:BATTLE behavior of Supreme Deliciousness and Ani medjool, Falafel has an image gallery in which "Israeli" photos of the food are "balanced" by photos from other countries. See Falafel#Image gallery. (The use of quotation marks indicates the silliness of describing a photograph as having a nationality.) — Malik Shabazz /Stalk 17:55, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Comments by others about the request concerning UserPlease keep your comments short, to the point, and restricted only to what an uninvolved administrator needs to know. I am perfectly willing (and able) to apply discretionary sanctions based on behavior on AE alone, and I will get creative.--Tznkai (talk) 17:02, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
A couple of questions: what do you mean by "A comprehensive and good faith proposal for a neutral standard on what order to be submitted for the consideration of The Israel Palestine Collaboration WikiProject" I don't understand what you mean. Also could you please point out precisely what sanction or remedy I have violated, and how I violated it and does this topic ban also include talking about these things at the talkpages? --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 19:00, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Comment - SD is currently under Arbcom restrictions that affects his abilities to change the ethnicity or nationality of people per this decision. nsaum75 23:40, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Result concerning User
|
Hittit
Users placed on various editing and revert restrictions. |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Attention: This request may be declined without further action if insufficient or unclear information is provided in the "Request" section below. Request concerning Hittit
Discussion concerning HittitTo Stifle: were said activity to continue, where would the proper venue be to take up resolving such matters? again the ArbCom board? the ANI?--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 19:12, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
1) Minimum 2 violations of reliable sources as well as user national background and neutrality on the “Genocide of Ottoman Turks and Muslims” article as described in Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan 2: Further reading - Publications
These sources are undoubtfully mentioned for reading as a propaganda material and WP:SOAP, which I also believe the whole article is for. 2) 2 reverts in less than 2 days violating 1RR on the Armenian Genocide Article:
3) All of the 3 changes above can easily be refered as Disruptive Editing (again as per Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan 2) with the editor not willing to get to the point as in WP:DE and discussed on the talk of Armenian Genocide article here . 4) 3 other 1RR violations of Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan 2:
5) These above could once again be seen in accordance to Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan 2 as Disruptive Edits with a controversial change of the meaning of the whole article and with violation of Consensus 6) Clear WP:OR, WP:SYNTH with faking the author's wording and context in Genocide of Ottoman Turks and Muslims edits discussed and proved on it's talk-page Talk:Persecution of Ottoman Muslims and Turks 1821-1922. These are surely methods the Hittit continuously uses to raise racial hatred in the reader and propaganda (WP:SOAP). 7) A possible vandalism deleting an image of New York Times from the Armenian Genocide article with no reasoning or discussion . Aregakn (talk) 00:15, 9 May 2010 (UTC) Aregakn (talk) 01:00, 9 May 2010 (UTC) Statement by HittitI find it pointless to engage in a war of words and succumb to Sardur’s tactics to shift discussions and attentions from one WP:AE to another. I am not looking for a battleground and would propose Sardur to have a look at his own revert and editing history. I personally have had enough of this charade. I leave this matter to the admins since I feel they have had enough of this behaviour as well. --Hittit (talk) 09:47, 8 May 2010 (UTC) Comments by others about the request concerning HittitAs per above noted by the filing party and the added 7 points by me, especially in conditions of the continuous similar actions by the responding party even after multiple warnings, I'd see an indefinite ban from related topics including nationalities and/or history etc. the minimal for this kind of, to put it mildly, WP:Tendentious editing. Aregakn (talk) 00:23, 9 May 2010 (UTC) Result concerning Hittit
|
Proxima Centauri
User given appropriate warning about sanctions. |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Attention: This request may be declined without further action if insufficient or unclear information is provided in the "Request" section below. Request concerning Proxima Centauri
Discussion concerning Proxima CentauriStatement by Proxima CentauriI don't understand what the problem is. Proxima Centauri The source I used shows clearly that some suspect muder which is all I suggested. (talk) 18:46, 9 May 2010 (UTC) Comments by others about the request concerning Proxima CentauriResult concerning Proxima Centauri
Request granted. I will be leaving the warning for Proxima Centauri. Sandstein 19:24, 9 May 2010 (UTC) — Y Done. Sandstein 19:35, 9 May 2010 (UTC) |
Tuscumbia
Attention: This request may be declined without further action if insufficient or unclear information is provided in the "Request" section below.
Not actionable because insufficient information is provided. |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Request concerning Tuscumbia
Discussion concerning TuscumbiaUser:Tuscumbia, User:Brandmeister and User:NovaSkola consistently remove all my edits. I've created a template about cities of the NKR. Tusumbia reverted all my edits and Brandmeister tooked this template on deletion. It is not the first conflict. Here You can see that several pro-Azeri users make a war in this article. However here is a discussion, this three users can't stop and continue the war of edits. More than that User:NovaSkola during the discussion of this article twice ( & ) moved the name of article even not participating in discussion and rudely after his second move he make a request for protection of the name on his point of view, however there were a discussion. By the way, today he moved the name of Mardakert (town) () Speaking about the actions of Tuscumbia, I also ask the administrators to take attentions on this edits: , , , , , , . This user just revert all my edits and delete my neutral source and pick unneutral source which can't be tooked in attention. --Ліонкінг (talk) 19:30, 11 May 2010 (UTC) Statement by TuscumbiaIt's pretty obvious that the user Ліонкінг (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) who repeatedly inserts his POV all over Misplaced Pages articles related to Armenia and Karabakh completely disregarding AA2 rules even though he was already warned by administrators as a result of a report by another editor not so long ago. He's also been warned by at least 2 editors: , . I am not sure if he wants to retaliate or simply lure editors into arbitration enforcements but the fact is that all of his edits speak of POV and Armenian propoganda. As a reply to his allegations above, please see the response below:
The user Ліонкінг continues to vandalize Misplaced Pages articles and no action or supervision is being enforced. As an act of courtesy, many editors have to keep reverting his biased POV pushing statements and edits and allow him to continue but the longer he continues to disregard AA2 rules, the more damage he causes within the scope of Azerbaijani-Armenian articles. Tuscumbia (talk) 20:06, 11 May 2010 (UTC) Comments by others about the request concerning Tuscumbia
Result concerning Tuscumbia
Closed as not actionable. Neither an arbitration remedy that is believed to be violated nor an explained list of diffs of edits that are believed to violate such a remedy are provided in this request. This board is not a forum for dispute resolution; see WP:DR. Sandstein 21:27, 11 May 2010 (UTC) |
Sciologos
Attention: This request may be declined without further action if insufficient or unclear information is provided in the "Request" section below.
Request concerning Sciologos
- User requesting enforcement
- -- Cirt (talk) 00:39, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
- User against whom enforcement is requested
- Sciologos (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Sanction or remedy that this user violated
- Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration/COFS#Article_probation
- Diffs of edits that violate this sanction or remedy, and an explanation how these edits violate it
- 19:17, 11 May 2010 -- Failure to WP:AGF, refusal to communicate with editor in good standing, at Talk:Xenu.
- 08:09, 11 May 2010 -- Lack of WP:CIVIL, violations of WP:NPA, comments directed at two specific editors as "half-Nazis".
- 17:58, 10 May 2010 -- Repeated failure to focus on content, instead directing comments at individual contributors.
- 17:34, 10 May 2010 -- Violation of Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration/Scientology#Editors_instructed, editing through multiple different IPs and non-conventional ISPs, proxy configuration, open ports, etc. More info of other IPs listed at Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Sciologos.
- 20:36, 9 May 2010 -- Use of talkpage as WP:NOTFORUM, to propose violation of site policy, in order to add "advanced speculation" (user's own words, repeatedly posted to talk page despite being informed of site policies regarding WP:NOR.)
- 20:33, 9 May 2010 -- Repeated disruption and waste of talk page, in order to propose to violate WP:RS.
- Diffs of notifications or of prior warnings against the conduct objected to (if required)
- 18:03, 10 May 2010 -- Notice of prior ArbCom cases, WP:COFS and WP:ARBSCI, by Cirt (talk · contribs)
- Enforcement action requested (block, topic ban or other sanction)
- Request topic ban from subject matter, Scientology and related articles - per violation of multiple policies in edits to area of ongoing Article Probation. -- Cirt (talk) 00:39, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
- Additional comments by editor filing complaint
Admin discretion may apply topic ban due to disruption at area under Article Probation from ArbCom per, Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration/COFS#Article_probation. However, of course, remedies from WP:ARBSCI could also apply here, especially with regard to the WP:SPA nature involved. Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 00:39, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
- Notification of the user against whom enforcement is requested
Discussion concerning Sciologos
Statement by Sciologos
Comments by others about the request concerning Sciologos
Result concerning Sciologos
- This section is to be edited only by uninvolved administrators. Comments by others will be moved to the section above.
- The COFS article probation doesn't appear to apply in this instance as the user's only contributions are to talk pages and an SPI. WP:ARBSCI remedies 4 and 5.1 could be applicable, particularly the latter. I will wait a reasonable time to hear Sciologos's response before taking action against them; the action would be likely to constitute a topic ban from the Scientology area. Stifle (talk) 10:44, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Nipsonanomhmata
Attention: This request may be declined without further action if insufficient or unclear information is provided in the "Request" section below.
Request concerning Nipsonanomhmata
- User requesting enforcement
- Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:59, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
- User against whom enforcement is requested
- Nipsonanomhmata (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Sanction or remedy that this user violated
- Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Macedonia#Discretionary sanctions (rv-warring; tendentious editing)
- Diffs of edits that violate this sanction or remedy, and an explanation how these edits violate it
- , , , : sterile rv-warring over several days, currently at 3R (together with ), in order to include a blatantly POV qualifier on an ethnically contentious historical figure
- , , : earlier rv-warring over the same issue on a different article; led to full protection of the article
- : refusal to engage in meaningful discussion on the earlier occasion
- , , Earlier rv-warring to include a passage of plagiarised text; led to full protection of article
- Blocked for extensive rv-warring and a protracted campaign of tendentious OR editing on a different issue (the Zappas Olympics and related articles)
- Diffs of notifications or of prior warnings against the conduct objected to (if required)
- 3RR Warning by Fut.Perf.
- Arbmac warning by Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)
- Enforcement action requested (block, topic ban or other sanction)
- Strict revert limitation (at a minimum at the same level recently imposed on a group of Albanian and Greek users by Stifle); possibly topic ban.
- Additional comments by editor filing complaint
Discussion concerning Nipsonanomhmata
Statement by Nipsonanomhmata
Fut Perf has accused me of doing what she has been doing. I have always debated these issues but she does not listen. Ali Pasha was no ordinary ruler. He was a despot of ill-repute who had a harem of boys (who were not volunteers) as well as women (who were not volunteers). Ali Pasha was a pederast, paedophile, rapist, and murderer who subdued the population where he was the despot. But any insinuation that he was anything less than a noble ruler is stomped upon by Fut Perf. And despite my providing numerous scholarly references (in the case of Ali Pasha every single reference has been deleted but more than that. Every single spelling correction on Ali Pasha was deleted until I pointed out that she was rv'ing every single spelling correction I had ever made).
In summary. I have never refused a meaningful discussion. I am just stomped on by Fut Perf. Nipsonanomhmata (talk) 11:27, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Response to , , , . The scholarly reference that I have contributed has been deleted time and time again. Every single time I have reintroduced the reference I have given a perfectly reasonable response in the reintroduction of the reference. Moreover, 3R does not apply. There have not been 3 reversals in a 24 hour period. Nor have I been spitefully edit warring. Nipsonanomhmata (talk) 11:47, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Response to . What has got to do with anything? I have contributed a useful reference and it has been reverted by somebody else. Nipsonanomhmata (talk) 11:43, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Response to , , . The exact same scholarly reference is denied for no reasonable reason. A scholar refers to Ali Pasha as a "despot" throughout his book. He is not the only one that does so but he happens to be a global authority on the military history of that part of the world. Moreover, the article on "Ali Pasha" includes the word despot in describing Ali Pasha but without a reference. My reference was deleted repeatedly. Why? Nipsonanomhmata (talk) 13:01, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Response to . I have not refused meaningful discussion. Where does it say that? The definition of the word "despot" in any dictionary is clear. Ali Pasha was a "despot". His Misplaced Pages article about him uses the word "despot" without a reference. I provided a reference. What exactly would you like to discuss? Would you like to discuss the right to call him a "despot" with or without a reference? Surely, having a scholarly reference is better than not having one. Nipsonanomhmata (talk) 11:44, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Response to , , . She has tarred me with the brush of plagiarism when I have spent hours introducing facts with scholarly references and bending over backwards trying to change the wording to avoid plagiarism and copy violations. With the added pressure of having had those references deleted time and time again and having to reintroduce them time and time again. Is this how editors are supposed to co-operate? If this is how we are supposed to do it then I can behave in the same fashion if you would like me to. If you don't like a reference then give me a good reason why and we can debate it. Nipsonanomhmata (talk) 12:00, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Response to . No, not extensive re-warring. Just rv'ing on Ali Pasha. Fut Perf pushed me in to the 3R trap. My first violation. I didn't know what 3R was at the time. She led me on and made sure that I fell in to it. Nipsonanomhmata (talk) 12:00, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Response to , . Why do I have to make myself ill explaining the same thing over and over again. I'll explain it one more time so that you all understand. A man with Bavarian parents is born in Greece and is considered to be a Greek and not a Bavarian (note, not an ethnic Greek, but a Greek national, a Bavarian-Greek with a Greek passport). But a man with Ottoman parents and grandparents who is born in the Ottoman Empire who is an Ottoman national and an ethnic Ottoman is touted as being Greek because his great-grandparents were Greek. You can't have it both ways. If the Bavarian-Greek is a Greek then the Greek-Ottoman, who has an Ottoman passport and no Greek passport, must be an Ottoman. If you consider the Ottoman to be a Greek then the Bavarian-Greek is a Bavarian. But why waste my breath. My contributions are not appreciated. At the time Fut Perf accused me of being a racist. Although I don't understand what racism has got to do with it since I had gone out of my way to explain why a series of events was not ethnically exclusive. The exact opposite of what I was being accused of. Nipsonanomhmata (talk) 16:19, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Moreover, Fut Perf has demonstrated WP:Battleground behavior whilst stalking me from article to article on subjects having shown no prior interest. Fut Perf has pursued me in sports-related subjects that Fut Perf has never shown interest in before taking an interest in me. See The Olympic Games sponsored by Zappas. This is where she has accused me of being a racist. Now tell me honestly. Is there any evidence whatsoever that I am a racist? I would like to know. Nipsonanomhmata (talk) 16:02, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Fut Perf has demonstrated similar behaviour at Greek War of Independence where I have been accused of plagiarism. Now that would be a neat trick since I was concurrently translating and summarising from the Greek language straight on to the Talk Page and third parties took my summary translation and reworked the wording before placing it in to the article text. Fut Perf has demonstrated a creative imagination. Nipsonanomhmata (talk) 16:02, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
I can live with that Sandstein. I had no intention of ever editing Ali Pasha ever again since all contributions are nuked by Fut Perf. Nipsonanomhmata (talk) 20:28, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Comments by others about the request concerning Nipsonanomhmata
With respect to the "despot" issue, although this is not the place to discuss content, I agree with the complainant that defining a ruler as a "despot" in the lead sentence without further qualification and without good editorial reason (such as in the course of a discussion of his governing style, as indeed happens at Ali Pasha#Ali Pasha as ruler) violates WP:NPOV#Impartial tone (see, in particular, WP:LABEL). This applies even if one source is provided who happens to call that ruler a despot (notably, it's a offline source and no quote is provided for context) and even if we happen to agree that the ruler was indeed a despot and generally a really unpleasant person in terms of our modern sensibilities (which would probably apply to many if not most autocrats of that time and region). However, this matter is rather close to being mainly a content dispute, rather than a (sanctionable) conduct issue, and so it is not determinative for the sanction I am proposing below. Sandstein 16:54, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
- I think this is a long-due report from FPaS and I thank him for going through the diffs. I don't like at all the aggressive response that Nipsonanomhmata is giving. I would add that he was incivil with me at the talk page of Evangelis Zappas by calling me desperate. I'll quote him: But are you so desperate you need to recruit a Greek patriot and hero in to your cause. here, which ended my contributions in Zappa. Good report. --Sulmues 15:56, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Result concerning Nipsonanomhmata
- This section is to be edited only by uninvolved administrators. Comments by others will be moved to the section above.
The request has merit. Edit warring is disruptive even when the three revert rule is not violated, see WP:EW. Nipsonanomhmata's reply is unduly aggressive and reinforces my impression that their mode of contributing to Misplaced Pages is problematic. Absent admin objection, I intend to impose a revert restriction and a topic ban from Ali Pasha. Sandstein 16:50, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
- There being no objections, under the authority of Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Macedonia#Discretionary sanctions, Nipsonanomhmata is topic-banned from one year from anything to do with Ali Pasha. For three months, he is also restricted to a maximum of one revert per page per rolling seven-day-period with respect to all content related to the Balkans. Sandstein 16:31, 13 May 2010 (UTC)