User talk:Thatcher/Alpha

I am currently busy in real life. I will check here and respond to questions about my own actions and edits, but I may or may not respond to requests for assistance on other matters. Please see the appropriate noticeboard for assistance. Thank you for your understanding.

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Matthew Hoffman

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Matthew Hoffman/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Matthew Hoffman/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, — Rlevse • Talk • 17:55, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Clerk status

My page and the clerk page show you as no longer a clerk (NYB indicated you retired in August), yet I see you doing clerk functions. What is your status? If you previously retired, when did you return? Or were you really just inactive for a while? Cheers, NoSeptember 12:39, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure that I fit into any particular pigeon hole. I retired, rather than list myself as inactive, for several reasons, one of which is that I do not intend to open or close or babysit any more cases. However, I still sometimes chat with the other clerks on IRC, and if I see something that needs doing, I may occasionally do it. Feel free to categorize me in any way you prefer. Thatcher131 14:26, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Ah, Senior status :) NoSeptember 15:11, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

So long as we do not refer to the rule of 80. Thatcher131 16:29, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

I claim the right to defend me

I was preparing a comment on my talk page, to show why my ban is uncorrect and excessive. I had not the right to reply to my last block, and to defend my self. As a consequence a block of one week, was changed into a permanent block and ban. My request is based on the following therms (see the link. [1]) I was judged as a consequence of several violations that I *never* did and about a supposed "general incivility" based on few minor accidents: I never inserted insults in my edits, despite the kbyte of insults I've received. So, I simply refuse the label of "uncivil", and I can provide several arguments for this claim. I do not ask my unblocking for now, but just the right to edit in my talk page to show my good faith. Nevertheless and administrator has blocked my page. See [2]. Not only I am a good contributor, but I was sentenced on the base of false evidences, and I can provide sources for my claim (and I was working for this). Most of all, the claim I reverted the edits "I did not like", is false: I've reverted just the edits offensive claims, as (I thought) it was my right, I did it in good faith (as usual) and perhaps because nobody defended me. Regards. user:Giovanni Giove, 16:07, 4 December 2007

I support the above claim. It seems there it is a well orchestrated "attack" against Giove by a group of Serbocroatians (centered around user:Kubura).

I have been accused of being a sockpuppet of Giovanni Giove by User:AlasdairGreen27, a "boy living in Ljubiana" (Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Giovanni Giove (4th)), even if there were undeniable proofs that my IP is totally unrelated with that of Giove (I live in Florida, while he lives in Italy). Please read:Conclusions This Wikipedia:Suspected_sock_puppets/Giovanni_Giove_(3rd) shows Cherso is unrelated to Giove. — Rlevse • Talk • 11:03, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Since last year Kubura has continuously provoked Giove, irritating him even in the Italian wikipedia. The minimum of offense this croat writes is to call ignorant whoever disagrees with his croatian POV (totally based on unreliable references from the Tito era). There it is an enormous and incredible amount of edits by this Kubura requiring everything against Giove from many users and admins: just read, please, his talkpage & contributions in the last years. Kubura has even been accused of using many "sockpuppets" by another user named Paxequilibrium, but in the "conclusion" of the case he has not been totally cleared by sure proofs. And the "boy living in Ljubiana", who has just accused me, repeats the exact phrases of this Kubura and writes edits to many users in the same way....

Now that these croatian users have "destroyed" Giove with a ban, who is going to face (with continuous edits from the Italian side) their croatian nationalistic POVs in the dalmatian topics? That is why they have provoked him - day after day, month after month - to do histerical edits (that generated a ban by admins who seems "too much friendly" toward the croatian side). I am now afraid that the croatian group (Kubura, Zenanarh, Direktor, etc..) has obtained fully the wanted objective: Free hands to do whatever they want on the Dalmatia-related articles of the English Wikipedia.

This is why I hope that you can help him with his ban. May be he can reach an agreement with you.

Sincerely. An old exiled from Dalmatia, who fully support Giovanni Giove in order to get a "balanced" Wikipedia.--Cherso (talk) 04:17, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

I for one, am certainly not part of any "organized group", nor am I "centered" on anybody. If anyone has been doing the provoking, its User:Giovanni Giove with his hundreds of undiscussed, badly written edits and reverts. The only reason he even got banned in the first place is that he underestimated the willingness of the community to enforce its restrictions. He totally ignored the findings of the ARBCOM and he got banned. Its not a question of provoking Giove, he simply did not take any notice of the restriction at all, as is evident from his block log.

All (or most) of the attacked "Serbocroatian users" are from the region of Dalmatia, and their interest in these matters may be considered normal, however, Giove and "the exiles", are a group of people who decend from Italians that left the region. It may be assumed that their emmigration (certainly not as drammatic as the title "exile" would suggest) forced them to endure hardship, wich left them quite BIASED in these matters. It is understandable that an NPOV cannot really be expected from these guys, isn't it? This is why expressions such as "balance" are simply an (obvious) clever way to make uninvloved Wikipedians oversimplify the matter and support a continuous edit-war with these radicals. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 17:53, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

I am glad to see that Direktor has quickly intervened, so admin Thatcher 131 can easily understand how the group of Croats behaves in Wikipedia everywhere and in perfect synchronization. He quickly provokes me writing that my "emmigration (certainly not as drammatic as the title "exile" would suggest)" was a normal hardship.... Well, I am not going to repeat the mistakes of Giovanni Giove and answer "tough". I am a mature old man who has never been able to go back to where was born, who has lost all the family properties in my Cherso island, who has lived "poorly" (I don't know if Direktor understands fully the meaning of this word) the first thirty years of exiled life in the USA until the American Dream was realized by me and my exiled father, and who has seen destroyed by Tito the Cherso cementery were my family rested for generations (in order to make disappear another "Italian" evidence in my Dalmatian island). Luckily for me, I have learned from America to have faith in democracy and western justice and stay away from the hate of nationalism and racism.

I am sure admin Thatcher131 understands very well that I only ask for a "balanced" Wikipedia, free -if possible- from nationalistic groups (Croat, Italian or whatever...). And I am sure Giovanni Giove -continuously harrassed for months/years by Kubura with his group- deserves another "chance".

Last but not least I want to pinpoint that Direktor -in my personal opinion- is the more "calm" (and less anti-italian) of the Kubura group, may be because he has distant Italian roots. Finally it strikes me the fact that the Russian "pro-Slavs" admin that initially punished Giovanni Giove in the Dalmatia arbitration (allowing him only one daily revert), did the same with the only Croat with some Dalmatian Italian roots, Direktor: strange punishment, while it was obvious that Kubura was much more involved (and has provoked fighting in the dalmatian issues for many more months) than Direktor. Strange, very strange....Anyway, I am not going to write again to admin Thatcher131, because I don't want to bother her. I am sure justice with prevail soon or later in this "ban-case", even thanks to her renowned honesty and dedication. Sincerely--Cherso (talk) 02:01, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Physchim62

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Physchim62/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Physchim62/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Cbrown1023 talk 20:49, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

HariRud & Beh-nam

New user HariRud seems to be very similar to banned user Beh-nam. Same attitudes, editing the same articles. Note recent unneeded edit to Kabul Province link, which is similar to previous edits by Beh-nam. Note also the sophistication of the first edit by HariRud at Talk:Afghan afghani link. --Bejnar (talk) 23:40, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

You can file a Request for checkuser to have this investigated. Thatcher131 03:12, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Never mind.  Confirmed by checkuser. Thatcher131 03:44, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Pls review

Please review Allegations of Chinese apartheid; I suspect this page should have been redeleted when the allegations of apartheid case closed. It is currently showing {{ArbcomDeletedpage}}. GRBerry 04:43, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Fixed, thanks. Thatcher131 02:04, 12 December 2007 (UTC)