On 11/25/06, Fred Bauder fredbaud@waterwiki.info wrote:
I saw Kiko just the other day. What is this innocent person, living an ordinary life, doing on Wikipedia with false information about him?
Fred
Thank you, Fred. Again I ask, "What evidence do you have that nobs did not attempt to discern the facts"
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_El...
and
"I do a search on Kiko Martinez, one result says he blew himself up in 1970, another makes reference to Kiko Martinez's widow, and other results cite Kiko Martinez attending rallies and lectures but does not give a date. So I write, "Kiko Martinez, who may or may not have blew himself up in 1970, attended rallies and lectures on unspecified dates", yet cannot attribute that to one particular source, would be considered original research. nobs 20:22, 6 December 2005 (UTC) "
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Verifiability&d...
The point being Mr. Bauder voted to accept the case " Based on Nobs01's edits to [[Talk:Chip Berlet]] " 02:42, 16 November 2005 (UTC), i.e. a Content Dispute.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration...
Further evidenced by Mr. Bauder's next entry on the case,
"Ok, here's the problem. You put stuff on there about Kiko Martinez; what does Chip Berlet have to do with Kiko Martinez? Fred Bauder 20:59, 16 November 2005 (UTC)", i.e. a Content Dispute
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Nobs01#Talk:Chip_Berlet
None of the Verifiable Citations I offered were intended as "personal attacks"; if blatant errors existed in the source material, I am extremely grateful for it being brought to my attention, which you did. The very fact that I altered course from writing on various Comintern activities in the 1930's & 1940's, to the NLG in the 1960's was because of the harassment I received since August 2005 (now 15 months). WP:Harassment defined as "actions which disrupt the editing activity of another user."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Nobs01_and_o...
But this evidence too was ignored.
Again, all I seek is a review and proposed modification of the language, " The ban may be renewed for additional years by any 3 administrators after its expiration should personal attacks of the virulence found in this case continue.", and perhaps clarification of when the twelve months end in my probationary period (2006 or 2007?).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Nobs01_and_o...
P.S. I believe in letting bygones be bygones, and am spending the time now extensively reviewing all discussions on WP:ATT, WP:RS, WP:BLP, and other such related discussions since last year. Thank you.
Nobs01