User talk:Orkadian

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Orkadian (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Whatever Mais oui! might allege, I am not a sockpuppet!

Decline reason:

Confirmed by Checkuser. There are no further grounds for appeal. -- Netsnipe ► 06:49, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

It is suspected that this user might be a sock puppet or impersonator of Mallimak.
Please refer to contributions for evidence. See block log and current autoblocks.

Please see: Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Mallimak. --Mais oui! 20:59, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion#Portal:Orkney

A portal created recently by User:Mallimak - the Orkney Portal - has been nominated for deletion. If you wish to take part in the discussion please contribute at:

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion#Portal:Orkney

Portal:Orkney and Wikipedia:Orcadian Wikipedians' notice board

Dear Orkadian, Thank you for your support with the above. Your "cease fire" suggestion is a fair one, and I would be willing to go along with it, but as for Mais oui! ....? Incidentally, I am a he. Quite likely in real life we know one another - Orkney is a small place! Give us a clue, maybe? Best wishes, Mallimak 19:45, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sock puppet accusations

You are being accused of being a sock puppet of me. See: Wikipedia: Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Harassment by Mais oui! Regards, Mallimak 16:59, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I GIVE UP!

I have tried to contribute articles on topics about which I have knowledge, such as Orkney, but the articles have been subjected to constant destructive editing, and I have been subjected to repeated harassment, mainly by Mais oui!, that I see no point in continuing.

I have now joined the ever-growing category of disillusioned Wikipedians. Mallimak 01:10, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page vandalism

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

Quit the sockpuppetry Mallimak. --Mais oui! 18:16, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add nonsense to Wikipedia; it is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. --Mais oui! 10:57, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.

Sockpuppets unwelcome

I do not allow sockpuppets to contribute to my Talk page. If you have anything to say Mallimak then have the guts to say it direct. All contributions from likely Mallimak sockpuppets, per Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Mallimak, will be immediately deleted. --Mais oui! 08:15, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I do not allow sockpuppets to contribute to my Talk page. Please desist Mallimak. --Mais oui! 18:35, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mallimak, if you have anything to say just get on and say it. I will not be demeaning myself by engaging in conversation with Fingerbob. --Mais oui! 22:02, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User page vandalism

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. --Mais oui! 19:39, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

tfd

TfD nomination of Template:False accuser

Template:False accuser has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. SFC9394 19:53, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Great template, Orkadian! I am sure there are a few Wikipedians (especially disillusioned ones) who could find a use for this. Mallimak 20:02, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please also create a template for false accusers of sockpuppeteerery? Mallimak 21:03, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk pages & Wikia

Please remember that talk pages are for discussing the article itself. While your edits refering to a Orkney & Shetland wiki are borderline on various related talk pages they should not be made outwith the talk namespace - I'm referring explicitely to them being added to Category:Orcadian Wikipedians and encyclopedic content on Shetland Islands and Orkney Islands. Do not do this.

Wikia might be of interest for hosting. Thanks/wangi 08:05, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page vandalism

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

Desist from using your sockpuppets to spam talk pages User:Mallimak. --Mais oui! 12:00, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No personal attacks

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you.

[1]

The only person making personal attacks here is User:Mais oui! with his persistent sock puppet allegations. Orkadian 13:07, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

--Mais oui! 12:04, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not make personal attacks on other people. Wikipedia has a policy against personal attacks. In some cases, users who engage in personal attacks may be blocked from editing by administrators or banned by the arbitration committee. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Please resolve disputes appropriately. Thank you. .

diff: [2]

--Mais oui! 12:28, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The only person making personal attacks here is User:Mais oui! with his persistent sock puppet allegations. Orkadian 13:07, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Abuse of edit summaries

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you.

[3]

--Mais oui! 14:50, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The only person making personal attacks here is User:Mais oui! with his persistent sock puppet allegations. Orkadian 13:07, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Orkadian is innocent, as this archived discussion (Talk Page Abuse) reveals!

Dear Orkadian,

I am sorry to see that you have been blocked. I can confirm that you are not a sockpuppet of me, but I don't suppose anybody will take any notice. However, the archived discussion below is revealing of the truth of the sitution:

Serial sockpuppeteer Mallimak (talk · contribs) is using sockpuppet account User:Orkadian to spam multiple Talk pages. The {{talkheader}} template has been removed and the spam repeatedly re-added. I request admin intervention:

Orkadian (talk · contribs)

--Mais oui! 12:11, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Example diff: [4]. --Mais oui! 12:15, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Provide evidence that Orkadian is a sockpuppet of Mallimak, please. It seems to me that Orkadian has become rather upset by your persistent accusations that he/she is a sockpuppet, and I can't see any evidence for that. --ajn (talk) 12:19, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Mallimak. --Mais oui! 12:32, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's hardly the most convincing checkuser result I have ever seen. It's equally likely that they happen to be editing from the same geographical area, and object to your stance on Orkney (oddly, quite different from your usual stance on regional and nationalist issues). --ajn (talk) 14:43, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please also see: [5]. There is a multitude of evidence. But that is not the point: what are you going to do about the Talk page abuse? --Mais oui! 12:39, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A suggestion, why not protect the talk page to [edit=sysop move=sysop] to prevent him from adding spam?? --LiverpoolCommander 12:41, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is part of a long standing conflict between the users and a more in depth look at the conduct of Mallimak, Orkadian and Mais oui! is in order.Inge 12:41, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is a Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Mallimak a suitable thing to proceed with?? --LiverpoolCommander 12:43, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, to be fair I would suggest a simultaneous Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Mais oui! or a combined one. The bits and pieces of the conflict I have seen lead me to believe that both these users could do with some helpfull hints. It seems IMHO that this is part of a complexe content dispute where one user is good at utilising wiki rules and the other is not. Inge 12:49, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A combined RFC seems like a good idea. Can anyone give me a brief overview of what the cause of the dispute is, what lead to it, and what the ongoing situation is - so that I have a clearer idea of it?? --LiverpoolCommander 12:50, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Wangi is very well-informed on this topic, although he has just had a Wikibreak, and so missed the last episode about a week ago. --Mais oui! 12:53, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One user is trying to insert the notion that Orkney has a special identity separate from the Scottish one and has been adding information regarding that to relevant articles. The user has also created stubs, categories and a portal to deal with Orkney subjects. The other user is asserting that Orkney is not any more different from the rest of Scotland than any other part of Scotland and has been removing such information from relevant articles and requesting the stub-templates and so on to be deleted. I think that is the core of this problem. In the process both users may have stepped over the line. The hows, ifs and whens need to be determined, proper guidance need to be given to the users and a permanent solution to the core dispute needs to be found. The articles involved are so low profile that it seems to be very difficult for the few users involved to get there on their own. Inge 13:07, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that overview, Inge. I think that Orkney should be counted as Scotland, as it is technically Scottish and not a sovereign state. This content dispute should be taken to a WikiProject who could assist with this incident. --LiverpoolCommander|Commander' 13:15, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the Orcadian users are claiming that Orkney is not a part of Scotland, but that the people who live there share an identity as Orcadians and that that identity is more or less considered separate from being Scottish. I don't think I am quite able to convey that situation acurately, but I would like to inform that I have the personal opinion that Orkney (and Shetland) claims of being different does have some creedence. They are not just another area of Scotland (allthough they are very much politically and legally part of that country) and history, geneaology and (former) linguistics back that up. But that really isn't the issue right now :) Inge 22:48, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comming back to the immediate issue, rather than the underlying problem...

One thing that needs to stop is the constant reverting an readding of Orkadian's comment on various talk pages. While the comment is not about the articles themself it's not worth getting into an edit war about. However the comment needs to be kept out of the article and category namespace and Orkadian has not readded them since I pointed this out. I'll pass on commenting on the comment itself...

I'm disappointed that Orkadian/Maillimak are not making any constructive edits. After this is an encyclopedia - and writting it is our goal, if you're just here to dick around with turf wars then...

I'm not convinced Orkadian and Maillimak are a single person, but if it is two people they're acting in close cooperation. I'll keep an eye on things, but i'm as busy as ever and back travelling tomorrow... Thanks/wangi 13:31, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the user(s) were initially trying to make constructive edits, but were over-enthusiastic and were then frustrated by Mais Oui!'s uncharacteristic objection to petty regionalism. I spotted this dispute a while ago, when MO listed the Orkney portal for deletion. Orkney does have a quite different history to the rest of Scotland, and Mais Oui!'s "just a council area" stance really doesn't do that justice. --ajn (talk) 14:49, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I support that view. I believe if a couple of outside editors would like to involve themselves more in depth the articles affected could be very much improved and the users in conflict could be guided back on track to the future benefit of Wikipedia. If we let this issue go now we will just find it again on a later date and/or loose valuable contributions. I see these request for help pages as somewhat of a jungle so if someone knows a more appropriate place to take this issue, please do so and give a link here. Inge 12:34, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mallimak is not blocked, I am at a looss to understand why he would use sockpuppets, but there is not much doubt in my mind that Orkadian and Gruelliebelkie are either sockpuppets or meatpuppets. That said, Mais Oui! is unquestionably prone to strong opinions and there is not a great deal of evidence of these disputants making any real attempt to find common ground. Any RfC should be a joint one, and should be called something like "Orkneys islands" rather than singling out one side or the other, there being evident fault on both. On the practical level I don't see that there are so many articles on the Orkneys as to make a separate portal necessary or desirable, but if people want to have one and link it from the Scotland portal then I don't really see how that would violate policy, since Orkadians unquestionably do have a separate identity at some level. Not that we are here to Right Great Wrongs, but I don't see any neutrality issue in dealing with the Orkneys as thematic set of articles. This is, of course, a superficial view. Guy 12:11, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am glad to see that there are some people here who have recognised what is going on. At the beginning I had so much to offer Wikipedia, and I made a start on contributing Orkney-related articles, an area of knowledge I know a great deal about. But then I encountered Mais oui!

I think it all started with his objection to the use of the term “Orcadian”, and he started replacing it everywhere with “Scottish”. Now let’s get this straight once and for all, “Orcadian” is an accepted term used to describe somebody from Orkney, and it is widely used – and for good reason, it pin-points the origin and culture of the person so described much more precisely than the term “Scottish”. (Furthermore, there are many in Orkney (and indeed Shetland) who object to being described as “Scottish”.) I have never claimed that “Orcadian” is a nationality, but neither, note, is “Scottish” a nationality. If Wikipedia is going to be consistent, the correct nationality is “British”! (I’ve not looked into it, but there must be analogous situations like Frankish/Bavarian/German or Frisian/Dutch.) I have never claimed that Orkney is a “sovereign state”, but note, Scotland is also not a “sovereign state”.

Anyway, it seems that I had inadvertently strayed into a territory that Mais oui! claims for his own. For example, it was he that set up the Portal:Scotland – but would he allow me to set up a Portal:Orkney – oh no! Incidentally, there is a Portal:Cornwall, and nobody seems to object to that.

Everything on Orkney that I contributed to Wikipedia had to be part of Mais oui’s domain, and he edited my articles in such a way to make sure that they were. Talk about WP:OWN.

I have plenty of encyclopaedic Orkney-related articles to contribute to Wikipedia, but what’s the point when Mais oui twists them and uses them as fodder to feed his own POV agenda. Personally, I feel Mais oui! should be banned from Wikipedia – he is distorting the project and putting off other contributors. He violently attacks users who disagree with him – sockpuppet allegations seeming to be his favourite form of attack. (Yes, shortly after Orkadian came onto the scene I did get in touch with him, and yes I am now in regular contact with him - but he is not me.) Out of frustration I have tried to retaliate against Mais oui!, but as accurately observed by Inge “one user is good at utilising wiki rules and the other is not”, and I am the one who is not - and why should I be? I didn’t come here to have my time and effort wasted by this kind of nonsense.

I have given up in despair. Until Mais oui! is banned (or at least banned from editing any article I contribute), there is absolutely no point in my contributing any further articles to Wikipedia. If you want to read NPOV encyclopaedic articles about Orkney, written by people who live here or have a close association with the islands and therefore know what they are talking about, I suggest you look out for our independent site.

Writing is my goal, not (as wangi puts it) “to dick around with turf wars“ – that’s Mais oui!’s specialism.

Mallimak 19:31, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]