[WikiEN-l] Fwd: Dispute Resolution

[Rob Smith]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Rob Smith <nobs03 at gmail.com>
Date: Nov 9, 2006 3:37 PM
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Dispute Resolution
To: Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net>


On 11/9/06, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
> I think I was in error. This is a spill over from legal conventions
> that is probably inappropriate on Wikipedia
>
> Fred
>
>

Thanks, Fred.  What are my Appeal Rights in getting my ban lifted and
modification of the probationary period since this error affected
presentation of defense and the subsequent course of the proceeding?

nobs01

WP:RS/History now states,

"To be verifiable, research must be based on the primary documents."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:RS#History

(note the term "must")

Nobs01 stated exactly this as such,

"I insist on primary source data"

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Venona_project&diff=prev&oldid=23890908

Nobs01 view in dispute mediation is now Official Wikipedia Policy.


Please review Evidence nobs presented in the locus of dispute, which
was ignored, i.e.User: Cberlet's inclusion here,

"Note identifying "KANT" as Harry Magdoff is not in original
transmission, and contradicts the text of the transmission. "

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Harry_Magdoff_and_espionage&diff=19799622&oldid=19799404

whereas the primary source

https://www.cia.gov/csi/books/venona/b35.gif

clearly identifies Magdoff as KANT, twice.



Retrieved from Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Nobs01 and
others/Workshop/General Discussion (available here
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Nobs01_and_others/Workshop&diff=29624873&oldid=29620731#General_discussion)

":#Here is a classic illustration of Cberlet in action. This series of
edits [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:I._F._Stone&diff=19650792&oldid=19645622][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:I._F._Stone&diff=19651425&oldid=19650966][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:I._F._Stone&diff=19651648&oldid=19651425][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:I._F._Stone&diff=19653907&oldid=19653575][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:I._F._Stone&diff=19711937&oldid=19711580][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:I._F._Stone&diff=19724352&oldid=19723074]
Cberlet demands citations from another editor 6 times in 24 hours;
simultaneously in interaction with nobs, Cberlet deletes citations
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Harry_Magdoff&diff=19793302&oldid=19744536][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Harry_Magdoff&diff=next&oldid=19796034]
and adds original research
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Harry_Magdoff_and_espionage&diff=19799622&oldid=19799404][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Harry_Magdoff_and_espionage&diff=19799814&oldid=19799622].

I don't know what others call this, by I view it as lack of good faith
editing at minimum. [[User:Nobs01|nobs]] 21:11, 29 November 2005 (UTC)


Lack of Good Faith, violation of the Harassment Policy, and an abuse
of process by pursuing dispute resolution entirely based upon
his Original Research.


I request a limited reopeing of the case so a modification of the
Probationary period can be considered.  Thank you.


Nobs01