Hi,

I'd like to set up a new language in wikipedia : luxemburgish (language code LU). I read in your howto that I simply have to post a message to this list to get it set up so, here's my message ;)

cheers, pst

--- sada asda unfairlybanned2001@yahoo.com wrote:

I have been banned unfairly three times. I was first banned because I allegedly violated a "3 revert rule" of which I was never warned about; regardless of whether I did break it, I was banned by a sysop (Guarnaco) involved in an edit war on the page -- this is a gross violation of sysop rules!

While I happen to agree that violating the three revert rule should be a temp banable offense, I note with dismay that this is not current policy.

from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Block_log (oldest first)

05:03, 4 Jun 2004 Guanaco blocked "Editing Saddam Hussein" with an expiry time of 24 hours (account created for the trolling and violating the three revert policy - was warned after third revert)

05:03, 4 Jun 2004 Guanaco unblocked "Editing Saddam Hussein" (typo)

05:03, 4 Jun 2004 Guanaco blocked "Editing Saddam Hussein" with an expiry time of 24 hours (account created for trolling and violating the three revert policy - was warned after third revert)

22:34, 4 Jun 2004 Guanaco blocked "Sad Ham" with an expiry time of indefinite (vandalism of [[Saddam Hussein]], illegitimate sockpuppet of Editing Saddam Hussein)

After I was unbanned by a more reasonably sysop, I was then immediately re-banned by RickK -- even though I had not edited any articles!!!!!!!! This second ban appears to be permanent, YET I HAVE NOT VIOLATED ANY RULES!

As 63.230.159.235, Editing Saddam Hussein, and Sam Ham, you kept adding this to the top of [[Saddam Hussein]]:

''This page refers to Saddam Hussein as "Saddam"; however, doing so may be inapppropriate. See the section below: '''==Hussein's Name=='''. As a result of this, the [[NPOV]] of this article is questioned.''

Guanaco and 172 kept removing this message while Everyking and 172 put the section you wrote about it back into a footnote.

From the ban log:

16:11, 4 Jun 2004 Jamesday unblocked "Editing Saddam Hussein" (unblock after discussion in IRC where agreed to discuss rather than edit war.)

17:57, Jun 4, 2004 RickK blocked "Editing Saddam Hussein1" with an expiry time of indefinite (sock puppet trying to cause trouble)

It is completely fallacious, RickKs claim that I am another user -- that I am a "sockpuppet". And even if I were, is it a crime? Am I double-voting? Am I agreeing with my other accounts, and creating false consensus? The answer to those questions are NO, this is NOT A SOCKPUPPET ACCOUNT.

For a new user you seem to know a lot about us. That alone sends up red flags for some people. I will therefore let somebody else unblock you.

-- mav

__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger. http://messenger.yahoo.com/

Just to be clear for people, here's what we know about "Editing Saddam Hussein."

The account was first created on June 4th. It was using the IP 63.230.159.235 prior to logging in as Editing Saddam Hussein. The IP was used for several of the edits to [[Saddam Hussein]], as well as to vote against my admin nomination. Subsequently, the attribution for that vote was changed to Editing Saddam Hussein. This can be seen at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Wikipedia: Requests_for_adminship&diff=3902017&oldid=3900347

As that vote was being cast, in IRC, Comrade Nick informed me that one of his "comrades" had voted against me. Comrades here refers to members of Red Faction, his little group that includes Mr. Natural Health, irismeister, and J.R.R. Trollkien. So we're faced with two possibilities here. 1) Editing Saddam Hussein showed up on Wikipedia and immediately joined an obscure group of users, as well as immedately took a side on the long-standing controversy surrounding 172, and that this side was detailed enough to identify who 172's "lapdogs" may or may not be. 2) Editing Saddam Hussein is a sock puppet.

Now, only a few minutes after that vote, Lir nominated Plato/Comrade Nick for administrator status, in part because of his leadership of Red Faction. Lir's IP address is known to be a Qwest address out of Iowa. The IP that Editing Saddam Hussein was using only ten minutes earlier was also a Qwest address out of Iowa. This, combined with the connection to Red Faction, nails the sock puppetry accusation beyond, to my mind, any serious objection.

The next day, Lir/Editing Saddam Hussein showed up in IRC protesting his 24 hour block. When people disagreed with him, including Fennec and myself, we were told to "plz stop talking" to him. Since this is a somewhat silly request in a public IRC channel, neither of us found it particularly binding. In my case, since I'd been accused of being a "lapdog" by this user, I was not particularly inclined to let his absurd and false summaries of events go uncorrected. Eventually, he began flooding the channel, as the log Fennec posted earlier in this discussion shows. For this, Tim Starling kickbanned him.

Aggravating all of this is the fact that, when 172 listed Editing Saddam Hussein/Lir on ViP, an IP address accused Editing of being a sockpuppet of "the retard otherwise known as Wik". Hadal deleted the accusation, and it was put back by a username designed to look like RickK - in fact, it was an impostor account using an i with an accent mark, and copying Rick's userpage so that it would pass a cursory inspection. The fake RickK also added his own belief that Editing/Lir was Wik. Indeed, it did pass cursory inspection, and fooled several users, including Hadal and, at first, myself. Now, this IP (219.88.160.45) is not a Qwest one, but one out of New Zealand, so there's no firm evidence tying it to Editing/Lir, but it should be noted that the fake RickK account was used to vote for the aforementioned nomination of Plato/Comrade Nick, suggesting at least some tie to Red Faction, which, while circumstantial, is suspicious considering that we already know sockpuppeting was going on here.

Sorry to be long-winded here, but I wanted to make sure no one was led into believing there was anything resembling an actual issue here. Just some marginally novel vandalism by the usual suspects.

-Snowspinner

On Jun 5, 2004, at 11:21 AM, sada asda wrote:

I have been banned unfairly three times. I was first banned because I allegedly violated a "3 revert rule" of which I was never warned about; regardless of whether I did break it, I was banned by a sysop (Guarnaco) involved in an edit war on the page -- this is a gross violation of sysop rules!   I then went to the IRC channel to appeal my case, where I was harrassed by users such as Snowspinner and Fennec -- whose sole intent was to "rub salt in my wounds" if you will. I started telling them, "Please do not talk to me. You are rude and inconsiderate" each time did so. Then I was banned, solely for asking them not to talk to me! If anyone should have been banned, it should be them for being so rude to another contributor!   After I was unbanned by a more reasonably sysop, I was then immediately re-banned by RickK -- even though I had not edited any articles!!!!!!!! This second ban appears to be permanent, YET I HAVE NOT VIOLATED ANY RULES!   It is completely fallacious, RickKs claim that I am another user -- that I am a "sockpuppet". And even if I were, is it a crime? Am I double-voting? Am I agreeing with my other accounts, and creating false consensus? The answer to those questions are NO, this is NOT A SOCKPUPPET ACCOUNT.

Do you Yahoo!? Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger_______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l