[WikiEN-l] Fwd: Completely unreasonable block and behavior by admin friends of Itaqallah to win a content dispute

[Tariq Ab- Jo- Tu-]

Take a look at 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/RunedChozo; 
the block was not lengthened for the edits on his talk page; it was over 
possible block evasion and further incivility. If the Request for 
CheckUser concludes that the IP is indeed RunedChozo, the block is most 
certainly valid. Otherwise, perhaps it will go back to the original 
forty-eight hours. However, I don't appreciate the accusations (not from 
you, George) of this being some Muslim Guild conspiracy. It's not; I'm 
not even a member of the Muslim Guild.

-- Tariq Ab- Jo- Tu-

George Herbert wrote:
>
>> As far as I can see, it's entirely over his editing of his talk page,
>> removing unblock request refusals and re-unblock-requesting, plus
>> arguing with people there.
>>
>> As a personal opinion - lengthening blocks due to ongoing argument
>> ONLY on a blockee's talk page is among the worst abuses that a pack of
>> administrators can commit, ganging up on someone.
>>
>> RunedChozo came into the argument with a bunch of abuses he'd
>> committed counting against him, and certainly was being disruptive on
>> several levels.  He did have one point that I see - Itaquallah did use
>> inappropriate edit summaries and remove material with source info
>> claiming it's unsourced.  There was a two-sided abusive edit war going
>> on; Itaquallah was not an innocent party there, and should have been
>> warned against that.
>>
>> It's hard to see this and not wonder if RunedChozo is too disruptive
>> to be a Wikipedia participant, but a bunch of admins have gone and
>> collectively beaten up on someone in a way which is not called for or
>> appropriate.  If someone can't stop being a dick on their talk page
>> while they're blocked, admins need to just walk away and let them cool
>> down.
>>
>> Bad day.
>>
>>
>>