Re: [WikiEN-l] Unblock request - Further explanations of the case

-- Raphael Fred Bauder wrote: > A small group of people who act like one person may be treated as one > person. > > Fred > > On May 27, 2006, at 7:02 AM, Ceyda Lacin wrote: > >> I will try to explain as briefly as possible: >> >> Please check the following links to see the case clearly: >> * [[Wikipedia:Wikiethics]] >> * [[Fethullah Gulen]] >> * [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_CheckUser/ >> Rgulerdem] >> >> Mr. Gulerdem informed me about Wikipedia. I liked it. He has solid >> background about [[Fethullah Gulen]] movement (besides many others I >> have to say). He told us about the article and the difficulties he >> has been facing to in that article. I am not an expert on the issue >> but I knew the movement through him and I have read quite a few >> books about Mr. Gulen and the movement. I decided to contribute to >> the article, so did my friend Hakan ([[User:Mokotok]]). I also tried >> to make some corrections and modifications on some other articles. >> >> Dr. Gulerdem mentioned about some structural problems he realized on >> Wikipedia and his trial for a proposal [[Wikipedia:Wikiethics]]. We >> quickly saw that there are (at least two [[User:Netscott]] and >> [[User:Azate]]) users sound like they have strong emotional tensity >> towards Mr. Gulerdem. As far as I understood a few people 'without >> much ethical concerns' or more kindly with some ideological or >> cultural (you can say religious if you like to) hatred against him, >> together pushed him into some trouble. He faced to an unjustified >> indefinite block by sysop [[User: Cyde]] with the pretext of 'user >> does not get it' while he was blocked already. All these discussions >> took place around the proposal [[Wikipedia:Wikiethics]] which seems >> to be a brilliant idea to me. Since the same sysop blocked him again >> indefinitely right after a check user case is filled, I have no >> doubt in mind that there are some clear structural problems in >> Wikipedia. (You can see the evidence of all these on >> [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_CheckUser/ >> Rgulerdem]). >> He did not even waited for the decision from the check user. Because >> Mr. Gulerdem was unblocked first time form indefinite block under >> some conditions, I think [[User:Netscott]] and [[User:Azate]] tried >> really hard to push him into the same violations so that they can >> ask for reinstatement of the indefinite block >> ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_CheckUser/ >> Rgulerdem]). >> That is the main picture in my mind. >> >> Because Dr. Gulerdem was careful this time and we were helping him >> to naturalize the article the last chance on their part was filing a >> check user case to claim that he is using sockpuppets to reinstate >> his indefinite block. They played it professionally and got what >> they want. Although we did not violate Wikipedia rules, it is >> strange that we all blocked for being suckpuppets which is in fact >> not a violation except under some certain situations which are not >> applicable to our case. >> >> What are these guys doing on that Gulen article: >> >> [[User:Azate]]'s edits are explained by Dr. Gulerdem at >> ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_CheckUser/ >> Rgulerdem#Response]). >> A check user request is filed about [[User:Azate]] and his earlier >> accounts and IP's. He claim otherwise but it seems to be that he has >> been editing on that article for a long time. The request was also >> asking about any possible relation between these two users but it >> was not investigated properly. Could you please do a favor to me and >> quickly check these users. I believe I have the right to learn that >> and it will be helpful to determine what is really happening. >> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:RFCU#User:_Azate). Please see my >> critics about [[User:Azate]]'s edits at >> ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Fethullah_G%C3%BClen/ >> Archive_2#Azate.27s_vandalism_and_violation_of_WP:OWN]). >> Other sections of this talk page might give you a better idea about >> who is doing what on that article. >> >> [[User:Netscott]] is making nonsense edits >> ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fethullah_G%C3% >> BClen&diff=next&oldid=53457962]) >> over exaggerating and agitating with a hope of possible violation on >> the part of Mr. Gulerdem. He is highlighting a link which is >> irrelevant to the article. Although he has no any significant >> contribution to the article other than agitation, he is very active >> in tag'ing the article with NOPV. Please not that they never >> provided a reason >> to tag the article with NPOV; that is illogical and not acceptable. >> I should also add that >> [[User:Azate]] was 'tag'ing the article while he was revising the >> article from head to toe as can easily be seen from the history of >> the main article. I hope this gives some insight >> about [[User:Netscott]]'s and [[User:Azatte]]'s motivations (The >> links are provided at >> [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_CheckUser/ >> Rgulerdem#Response] >> you can also look at the history of the Gulen's talk page to see the >> quality of Netscott's edits). I cannot see how he could escape from >> a block >> that is applied to two others in the same conflict >> [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:AN3#User:Netscott] (It should not >> be surprising to see the support of the same sysop at this link). I >> have an impression that [[User:Netscott]] is mainly contributing >> Islam related articles and I have to say that he likes to look at >> the issues from a negative perspective which cause some problems >> with other editors. One can check this and see many examples of it >> from his talk page. >> >> Where am I in this picture? I and Hakan found ourselves in the >> middle of this mess, ideological hatred towards an editor (who we >> know personally) and 'push him to an indefinite block' game. A check >> user case is filled for us with the accusation of sockpoppetry, and >> the decision was incorrect. If you please check the accusations, >> there is no a single serious statements made among those >> accusations. In spite of this, they are already answered by Hakan >> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_CheckUser/ >> Rgulerdem#Comments_Light.26Truth_and_Mokotok) >> and Dr. Gulerdem >> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_CheckUser/ >> Rgulerdem#Response). >> >> Needless to say that I can survive without Wikipedia. I can also >> change my name to edit further with a different name if I need and >> want to. But on the other hand this baseless and inappropriate >> accusation bothers me a great deal and principals always matter. >> >> Thanks for your careful analysis of the dispute and attempt for a >> just solution to the matter. If you need further explanations (I >> doubt it!) I will try to give you more insight about the problem. >> >> Ceyda Lacin >>