User talk:98.203.142.17

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, 98.203.142.17, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one of your contributions does not conform to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy (NPOV). Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media.

There's a page about the NPOV policy that has tips on how to effectively write about disparate points of view without compromising the NPOV status of the article as a whole. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  الله أكبرMohammad Adil 12:25, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Please avoid WP:edit-war, and discuss changes you desire on the atricle's talk page beforte you make them.

You can come at Talk:Umar and discuss regarding your concerns. For the time being i am reverting article to is pre-edit-war version. Regards. الله أكبرMohammad Adil 12:27, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

You might consider alerting the Arbitration Committee, which first attacked my name for dealing with this kind of nonsense, and then banned me for fighting back. "He was a middle class merchant and was a ruthless man and emotional polytheist who often treated Umar badly." This is writing the Committee should be happy to take credit for.

In case you missed it, I am a banned editor. I have no trouble with you bringing this up at any of the noticeboards, which is pretty much guaranteed to get this IP blocked. I only ask that you include the text of the disputed passage in your complaint, so there is a clear record of exactly what ArbCom is defending.98.203.142.17 (talk) 14:27, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

If u wish we can discuss it on Talk:Umar, where other users can also contribute to discussion and can help reaching a consensus. Any by the way you didn't yet have explained your concerns over tht sentence, wht exactly bothers you, if u could explain, it would be helpful in resolving the matter by mutual consensus.

Regards. الله أكبرMohammad Adil 14:31, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Okay. Thanks for the invitation; I'll post to talk:Umar tomorrrow. In the meantime, please don't wikistalk me, as you did here;[1] this can only lead to problems.98.203.142.17 (talk) 14:35, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

When i see something wrong, i correct it, its isn't wikistalking, if you have issues regarding the multiple meanings of certain Arabic words, we can discuss it as well, but plz avoid edit reversion, its mean, i would appreciate if you rather discuss it on article's talk page, so that other contributors may also contribute.

I am putting it back to status quo.

الله أكبرMohammad Adil 14:41, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Please don't - you don't know what the heck you're talking about.98.203.142.17 (talk) 14:45, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Plz be civil, constructive suggestions and edits are welcome, but such threats don't work.

الله أكبرMohammad Adil 14:52, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

What is your knowledge or expertise in Arabic literature or linguistics? Zero. You reverted me because I removed your loaded language on Umar; it's that simple. You should not be allowed to make edits for this reason.98.203.142.17 (talk) 14:55, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Wht make u think i hv zero knowledge of Arabic ?

U have violated WP:Three revert rule, and i am forced to notify a related noticeboard. الله أكبرMohammad Adil 15:01, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Like I said, go report me, just make sure to include the full text of the disputed content, so people can see for themselves what the ArbCom supports.98.203.142.17 (talk) 15:03, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Action taken per the complaint at WP:AN3

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month for Abusing multiple accounts. Please stop. You are welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below.

Per your admission (on the talk page above) that you are a banned editor. The report which led to this action is at WP:AN3#98.203.142.17 reported by User:Mohammad adil (Result: IP is a banned editor). EdJohnston (talk) 23:46, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

So much for content, eh? Administrators such as yourself ensure that your "encyclopedia" is full of addled nonsense, taking responsibility for precisely nothing.

Even your block notice is inaccurate, for I have not abused or even used multiple accounts. The opposite: I'd edited transparently, with full disclosure of my background. Were I sockpuppeting, you'd not have blocked me.98.203.142.17 (talk) 00:10, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

OK then. Please explain why you consider yourself a banned editor. EdJohnston (talk) 00:24, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

My user account, User:Proabivouac, was banned out of process by Kirill Lokshin for outing User:Krimpet on the Wikipedia Review; I did this because "Krimpet" and ArbCom outed me in 2007. I've had a number of IPs since then, and ArbCom has generally chosen not to block them, so long as I focus on mainspace. I suppose I should have returned as a sockpuppet and become an administrator, or even an arbitrator, but I prefer a more direct approach.98.203.142.17 (talk) 00:34, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

If your quarrel is with Arbcom, not sure how you can make any progress by dealing with individual admins. Per this log, Proabivouac is not to be unblocked without consulting the AC. So, why don't you write to them, and ask for consideration by the ban appeals committee? It's been more than a year. EdJohnston (talk) 01:07, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

To file an "appeal" would concede their authority to have outed and then banned me to begin with. Instead, I will continue to occasionally post the real world identities of Wikipedia sysops and arbitrators offsite (most recently on Hivemind) until the Arbitration Committee voids in full its lawless, hypocritical and unfair actions.

I notice you just supported the RfA of a "returning user", who abandoned previous account due to privacy concerns.98.203.142.17 (talk) 01:21, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

If your plan is to win over Arbcom by continuing to out people, I won't take any bets on your success. EdJohnston (talk) 04:43, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

If they liked me, they wouldn't have opened an attack page against me, outed me and banned me, right? Sure, they probably liked me a little less after I started pushing back, but what can you do? Their approval isn't worth much if I’m still banned.

I'm happy to talk, though, if one or more of them would be willing to arrive here and discuss a possible resolution.98.203.142.17 (talk) 08:06, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Okay, as no one has responded, I'll identify another administrator in the place this has been happening recently (not on Wikipedia, of course, where I follow the rules.) I don't enjoy this, and I'm too busy to go on a proper rampage…but generally the policy is that a block is answered by an identification, I let that slide a few times, and it's not done any good.

Sad, since I'm basically interested in content, but, hey, that's your (and your readers') loss.98.203.142.17 (talk) 06:40, 14 January 2010 (UTC)