Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kurds and Kurdistan/Evidence

Main case page (Talk) — Evidence (Talk) — Workshop (Talk) — Proposed decision (Talk)

Case clerk: TBD Drafting arbitrator: TBD

Arbitration case pages exist to assist the Arbitration Committee in arriving at fair, well-informed decisions. This page is not designed for the submission of general reflections on the arbitration process, Wikipedia in general, or other irrelevant and broad issues; and if you submit such content to this page, please expect it to be ignored or removed. General discussion of the case may be opened on the talk page. You must focus on the issues that are important to the dispute and submit diffs which illustrate the nature of the dispute or will be useful to the committee in its deliberations.

Submitting evidence

• Any editor may add evidence to this page, irrespective of whether they are involved in the dispute.
• You must submit evidence in your own section, using the prescribed format.
• Editors who change other users' evidence may be sanctioned by arbitrators or clerks without warning; if you have a concern with or objection to another user's evidence, contact the arbitration clerks by e-mail or on the talk page.

Word and diff limits

• The standard limits for all evidence submissions are: 1000 words and 100 diffs for users who are parties to this case; or about 500 words and 50 diffs for other users. Detailed but succinct submissions are more useful to the committee.
• If you wish to exceed the prescribed limits on evidence length, you must obtain the written consent of an arbitrator before doing so; you may ask for this on the Evidence talk page. For this case, clerks at their discretion may give non-parties an extension to 1000 words and 100 diffs.
• Evidence that exceeds the prescribed limits without permission, or that contains inappropriate material or diffs, may be refactored, redacted or removed by a clerk or arbitrator without warning.

Supporting assertions with evidence

• Evidence must include links to the actual page diff in question, or to a short page section; links to the page itself are inadequate. Never link to a page history, an editor's contributions, or a log for all actions of an editor (as those change over time), although a link to a log for a specific article or a specific block log is acceptable.
• Please make sure any page section links are permanent, and read the simple diff and link guide if you are not sure how to create a page diff.

Rebuttals

• The Arbitration Committee expects you to make rebuttals of other evidence submissions in your own section, and for such rebuttals to explain how or why the evidence in question is incorrect; do not engage in tit-for-tat on this page.
• Analysis of evidence should occur on the /Workshop page, which is open for comment by parties, arbitrators, and others.

Expected standards of behavior

• You are required to act with appropriate decorum during this case. While grievances must often be aired during a case, you are expected to air them without being incivil or engaging in personal attacks, and to respond calmly to allegations against you.
• Accusations of misbehaviour posted in this case must be proven with clear evidence (and otherwise not made at all).

Consequences of inappropriate behavior

• Editors who conduct themselves inappropriately during a case may be sanctioned by an arbitrator or clerk, without warning.
• Sanctions issued by arbitrators or clerks may include being banned from particular case pages or from further participation in the case.
• Editors who ignore sanctions issued by arbitrators or clerks may be blocked from editing.
• Behavior during a case may also be considered by the committee in arriving at a final decision.

Evidence presented by Supreme Deliciousness

Paradise Chronicle repeatedly claims me and others of showing tolerance to ISIS

User:Paradise Chronicle has repeatedly made the baseless claim that me and other users of showing: "tolerance towards ISIS" [1][2]"ISIS-Erdogan or Assad POV pushing" [3].

At the first diff Paradise Chronicle was defending the sockpuppet User:Konli17 who was the one that started the entire disruption at the Syrian Kurdistan article. Without that sockpuppet there wouldn't be any arbitration case right now. "That they now want to oust Konli17, who really improved many articles"[4] the sockpuppet Konli17 adding fake maps into Wikipedia:[5][6][7][8][9][10][11](This is the fake map: [12]) removes well sourced historical info that Kurds migrated from Turkey into Syria: [13][14]. There are many more diffs just like these by the sockpuppet Konli17 that Paradise Chronicle felt the need to defend while claiming the disruptive sock had "really improved many articles".

Expand: Take a look at this comment:[15] Not only does Paradise Chronicle once again claim me and others of having an ISIS POV but his comment seems like some kind of promotion or recruitment attempt. Does this look like someone that is here to build a neutral encyclopedia? --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 06:20, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

User:Levivich removes reliably sourced information that shows "Western Kurdistan" as not being in Syria

Today's Kurdish nationalist claim is that part of Syria is "Kurdistan". They call this "Syrian Kurdistan" or "Western Kurdistan". There are historical sources that show that "Western Kurdistan" is not in Syria. These historical sources therefore exposes today's Kurdish nationalist claims as having no historical basis. Levich decides to remove the well source historical information from the article: [16][17]

Admin User:Valereee introduces source restriction that gives editors veto power to remove undisputed historical info

Valereee introduces source restriction [18] Valereee later clarified that it is "disputed" not because the content was disputed by another source, but because another editor disputed it: [19] Basically giving unprecedented veto power to Levivich and other users to remove sourced and undisputed content out of the article. This has now led to large amounts of undisputed and well sourced historical information and historical maps being removed from the article [20][21] and no one dares to say anything against this in fear of getting blocked. I ask the arbitrators to please lift this newly implanted source restriction.

I would also like to bring attention to a comment made my an uninvolved Administrator at the AN where he perfectly described the situation: "You can easily see how this could be gamed, though: somebody finds a historical detail they don't like, appropriately cited to a pre-2000 source, edits it out and boom, now it's "disputed" and the bar for re-adding it is much stricter than projectwide policy supports."[22]

Unfair behavior of admin Valereee

On 28 November Valereee blocked me because I said "cherry picked sources" [23] and said at my talkpage: "Talk about the edits, not the editor.". On 7 January Levivich accused me of "cherry picking" [24] Valereee did not give him a block, not even a warning at his talkpage. Even when i pointed this out to her: [25] So there is one type of rules that only I have to follow and I get blocked for but "the other side" does not have to follow those rules and they will not receive any block for saying the exact same thing.

Rebuttal to Valereees comment:[26]. Anyone can clearly see the exchange between me and her at my talkpage and see that she blocked me mainly for "cherry picking", that was the main issue: [27][28]. Even when she added the block notice to my talkpage she only mentioned "cherry picking", nothing else: [29], this further proves my point. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 08:44, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Note to arbitrators: Valereee has changed her initial response to my rebuttal: [30]. So lets recap: She blocks me and in the block notice at my talkpage only mentions "Cherry picking", nothing else:[31] and at the discussion at my talkpage she only mentions "Cherry picking", nothing else:[32][33] and when I bring up Levivich saying the same thing at her talkpage she never denies that the issue wasn't cherry picking:[34] Then when I bring up her unfair behavior in this section she all of a sudden states that it wasn't "cherry picking" that was the issue, now the main problem is something else:[35] Then when I bring up her past comments at my talkpage including block notice where she only talks about "cherry picking" and nothing else:[36] she then changes her story once again:[37] --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 05:59, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

I will ad more evidence later. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 22:46, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Evidence presented by Semsûrî

Background

I was asked by El_C[38] to summarize the general disruption I've seen in Kurdish-related articles, so here we go. I've seen an immense amount of POV-poshing, disruptive editing that almost always resulted in the editors getting blocked after not being able to argue for their edits and/or personally attacking me. I started cleaning Kurdish-related articles back in March 2019 and experienced daily sockpuppetry, meatpuppetry, hounding, povforks, ANI-abuse and one editor impersonating me to get me banned. Ultimately many, many and many editors were banned indefinitely. Most of this took place from March to June 2019 and slowly ebbed out by the end of the year but the problem does flare up sometimes.

This entry is therefore about the general disruption seen in Kurdish-related topics since 2019. If I had to describe the disruption, it was definitely attempts to question the Kurdishness of the respective articles, but easy to counter since they were blatant POV-pushes.

Summary

Kurmanji and Yazidis (March-June 2019)

• Kurmanji

This page was one of the articles experiencing a lot of disruption. Prior to my involvement, the article saw an attempt to disassociate this Kurdish dialect/language from Kurds. You can see how the word 'Kurdish' is being removed by this editor[39]. I then removed the blatant POV-push[40] (and general clean up) but was reverted and accused of conducting ethno-pov[41] by the same editor. This user would ultimately get blocked but the article continued to experience disruption and POV-pushing immediately after[42] which continued till June when it got indefinitely protected[43]. On October 25th, protection was lowered[44] but reinstated the next day[45].

• Kurmanjis

Annoyed by my actions at the 'Kurmanji'-page, the same editor(s) chose to focus on the already-existing Povfork Kurmanjis which without any reference claimed that Kurmanji-speaking Kurds were in fact an ethnic group.[46] This was just another attempt to disassociate the Kurmanji vernacular from Kurds. They failed linguistically and now attempted ethnically. Nonetheless, they failed and the page was redirected to Kurds.[47]

• Template:lang-kmr

Perhaps the best example of how ridiculous this vandalism is. This template is only used on one page [48] but has experienced a long-standing ping-pong between removing and adding the word 'Kurdish' after 'Kurmanji'[49].

• Ezidkhan/List of Yazidi settlements

The state of the article before I got involved[50]. The main issues were pushing for the notion that Ezidkhan was a geographically defined territory but also the attempt to portray the flag of the HPÊ as the flag of Yazidis. I removed the flag[51] and general clean up like removing blogs used as reference. I got called a Kurdish nationalist[52] and the editor was ultimately banned. I subsequently moved the article to List of Yazidi settlements[53] and made it into a page containing villages populated by Yazidis. I moreover cleaned up articles where Ezidkhan was portrayed as an autonomous entity in this fashion[54] and in total these articles included most of the articles included in this category.

• Persecution of Yazidis by Kurds

Ultimately redirected to Persecution of Yazidis by Muslims, this page was just a 'let's find anything we can on Muslims of Kurdish origin oppressing Yazidis and add it here', despite the fact that scholars clearly stated that the oppression took place due to the religion and not the ethnicity of the perpetrators.

Tribes and dialect of Laki (May-August 2019)

Editor Shadegan had for years and almost succeeded in their pov-push on various articles until I confronted them with references. Never have I experienced an editor so determined to their cause and any interaction was completely futile due to lack of a direct answer. Instead they would turn to personal attacks and start disrupting unrelated Kurdish articles just to annoy me. For example, they would request a name move for Flag of Kurdistan and Iranian Kurdistan which also attracted some of the disruptive editors and IPs from the Kurmanji/Yazidi group[55][56].

The main pov-push from Shadegan was the attempt to question the Kurdishness of Kurdish tribes and dialects. Most of these pages had to be almost fully rewritten, so before and current urls of these articles is probably the best way to showcase the pov-push:

• Before|Now
• Before|Now
• Before|Now
• pov-fork now redirected

Disruptive editors from the Kurmanji/Yazidi group joined in in another dispute as well[57].

Hounding (October 2020)

Back in October last year, I expanded these articles Kifri, Jalawla, Khanaqin and other similar articles. As I expanded these articles, one editor with various accounts kept rewording my edits (and thereby add OR) to suit their POV. Examples: [58][59][60] --Semsûrî (talk) 16:06, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Evidence presented by Brunswicknic

There is heat around Kurds and their issues, even in small things

I have watching Gaziantep, in it there has been small edits to raise Kurdish points, sometimes clumsy, but in good faith. But they seem to be met with short, unhelpful responses. There is frustration, there is strong indication of "deeper issues" at play. The editors concerned though have not overstepped any lines of wiki-behaviour here, just an example of the problems around Kurds and things related to them. Brunswicknic (talk) 03:28, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Evidence presented by Valereee

Just for the record, Special:Diff/991171223 is not me objecting to "cherry picking", although cherry picking is always objectionable. But my objection was to SD saying 'cherry picked sources that further pushes the debunked "Syrian kurdistan" fraud'. The cherry picking is bad, but it's the assertion of 'further pushes the debunked SK fraud' that was the problem. ETA: and SD is right, I should have been clearer that there were two specific problems in their statement I was objecting to. —valereee (talk) 22:00, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Evidence presented by ProcrastinatingReader

Syrian Kurdistan source restriction

Little opinion on Kurdistan or much of this case, but I dispute SD's timeline of events and presentation in the section about the page restriction.

• valereee instituted a source restriction at Syrian Kurdistan under the Syrian Civil War community sanctions.[61][62]
• The restriction says "For any disputed content, only scholarship from the past 20 years can be used as sourcing, with preference for the past 10 years".
• The restriction does not give "unprecedented veto power to Levivich and other users". Any editor, including SD, may report violations of the restriction. No particular editors were/are targeted by the sourcing restriction.
• SD appealed this to the administrators' noticeboard, as is their right per the process of appealing community sanctions.[63]
• The discussion, by my reading, found 7 uninvolved editors in support and 4 opposed to the restriction, though it was not formally closed. Regardless of whether one sees 'a consensus in favour' or 'no consensus' in that discussion, in both cases there is evidently no "clear and substantial consensus" to overturn the restriction (as required per the normal rules to overturn/modify). Thus, the restriction is upheld by the community.
• SD was informed of this on valereee's talk, multiple times[64]
• On I ask the arbitrators to please lift this newly implanted source restriction. I believe the only venue for appeal of community-authorised discretionary sanctions is to the community at AN, not ArbCom, and the discussion imposing the sanctions said as much.
• "Disputed" in DS/GS generally means 'disputed via reversion', not 'disputed by other sources'. This is not an exceptional definition.
  • Template:American_politics_AE: any edits that have been challenged (via reversion) (emphasis mine).
• Such restrictions are not exceptional. Many pages in the community sanctions regime have page restrictions on sourcing. (eg [65][66][67]; non-exhaustive)
• ArbCom has previously affirmed an admin under DS enacting sourcing restrictions. (Admin enacting DS restriction, Affirmed by ArbCom and expanded across topic area, not just a single page)

The restriction is well-designed (perhaps not perfect, but we failed to come up with something better in the AN discussion) and quite proper in my view. It appears to have been intended to reduce disruption (and reduce it did), and upheld by the community for these reasons.

Evidence presented by Paradise Chronicle

Editors remove the mention of Kurdistan

diff Removing Northern Kurdistan in the Category Turkish Kurdistan

diff Removing Iraqi Kurdistan in Kurds in Iraq for unsourced

diff Kurdistan is a secular idea. It doesn't exist because it has no reason to exist...,there isn't really such thing as a Kurdish name in this very ArbCom Case on Kurds and Kurdistan

diff Removing Kurdistan from Kurmanji (the article about a Kurdish language)

diff Removing Turkish Kurdistan in the city Nusaybin (in Turkey) and it is noted that it is Kurdish majority city just before the mention of Turkish Kurdistan.

Editors denying a Syrian Kurdistan

diff

Removal the Kurdish name of a locality

Often editors remove just the Kurdish name of the locality

diff removing Kurdish for unsourced, but leaving Arab unsourced at Jarabulus

diff Dilok at Gaziantep for unreliable source

diff again Dilok because they were apparently Wikipedia sources, one was a Kurdish source, the other a Turkish one.

diff this edit history happens sometimes.

diff at Ain Dara

No.3 is tricky, might be a misunderstanding, we could assume good faith for this edit, but they claim diff there isn't really such thing as a Kurdish name.

Lack of civility

Amuda in the Jazira Region is a good example how it works with civility in Kurdish articles in Syrian Kurdistan diff

diff etc. Several removals of the Jazira Region in the pro-Kurdish AANES, and subsequent reverts, diff diff etc. then a diff of an uninvolved editor who states that Amuda actually is Governed in the Jazira region, then again revert for the reason that the category was created by a blocked editor.

at Al Malikyah, too

An editor asks for a move. No-one opposes for 10 days. He moves the page and an edit war begins. Today it is again Al Malikiyah.

at Tell Abyad, too

diff literally I don't care what you think about the WP article in a long discussion on Kurdish names and issues.

Turkish Government POV - Whitewashing events

Seeming to classify areas liberated from ISIL (Like former ISIL stronghold Tell Abyad) as Kurdish or PYD occupied. (October 2016) diff Being occupied by MILITARY FORCE...

diff The areas in your maps are occupied by military force

diff claiming Operation Euphrates Shield was directed mainly at ISIS

diff suggesting the Kurdish-YPG (who is supported by a global coalition fighting ISIL) and ISIL are just as bad

diff diff Wanting to move Syrian Kurdistan into Kurdish occupied regions in Syria in the midst of the very well known ISIL led Siege of Kobane

Turkish POV during the Siege of Sur

diff classify the attempts the Kurds made to receive autonomy as Kurdish Separatism (unsourced!) and removing Turkish Kurdistan

By misrepresenting sources

diff in List of assassinations of the Kurdish–Turkish conflict, removing Hevrin Khalaf, Hevrin Khalafs murder was sourced by WaPo.

Denying academic sources

diff We have a ton of evidence presented throughout the article and the Talk page that this is a term used/invented by Kurds after someone just brought in ca 15 (WP:Overkill) sources, (most of them academic) for a Syrian Kurdistan.

diff only! removing academic sources for a Syrian Kurdistan.

Edit-war a controversial book review by a PhD student back into the lead

diff

Closing statement

I'd like to add that I am interested in general improvement of the civility in, the quality and the NPOV within the edits performed in Kurdish related articles. Some of these issues are here since years, and it doesn't really matter who does them, (there will probably come new disruptive editors again, as we see it in the Armenian/Turkish issue), but that they are tolerated to happen. The diffs presented are just the ones the current editors thought to be important, but other editors were here also before some of us, and sometimes they had the same issues.

Evidence presented by El_C

Assertion!

Please note, for example, today's action involving Special:Contributions/ShewanKara. With disruption beginning over 2 months ago. Indeffed by me today (a few minutes ago). Had there been better tools (like a DS/alert), for both editors and admins, much disruption and distress could have been avoided. This is par for the course. My hope, then, is that the Committee approves of ACDS measures to address this chronic, poorly-attended (from an enforcement perspective) problems that have been afflicting this topic area for so long. El_C 13:56, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Evidence presented by AIKعمرو بن كلثوم

Personal attacks on other users by Paradise Chronicle

• Repeatedly makes baseless accusations claiming other editors of showing "tolerance towards ISIS":

• Here.
• Here: Quote below:

The complaining editors SD, Amr Ibn and ThePharoah17 have all shown a very surprising tolerance to the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) which appears not to be on the radar of the Admins.

• and Here

Same user Attacking Admins

• Here they attack admins and clearly express their own pro-Kurdish POV agenda.

  If a request on a efficient and resilient pro-Kurdish editor is filed, admins were likely to T-Ban or block the editor. But I didn't find yet an admin who is willing to even address the issue of anyone calling the areas liberated from the Islamic State of the Levant or Jihadists (the best known UN classified Terror Organization in the world with countless front-page appearances in reliable sources, and a terrible women's rights record) Kurdish occupied, even if those are made in pages within the scope of the Wikipedia:General sanctions/Syrian Civil War and Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.

BLP violations by Paradise Chronicle

• WP:BLP violations here

Eva Savelsberg is not a good source, but others are. ... She attends Forums organized by the SETA and listen how she talks about freedom of press in the AANES

• and here

Harun Yahya refutes Darwinsim and is accused of anti-semitism according to his Wikipedia article. Maybe not the best source for a controversial phrase on Wikipedia

Paradise Chronicle ignored result of arbitration case they opened and edit-warred during process

User Paradise Chronicle ignored DRN case they opened and suggestion by volunteer user Nightenbelle, and decided to remove the SOURCED Washington Post material and Washington Institute material and continued to edit-war. They even removed the material during the DRN

Whitewashing and self-declared POV

User Paradise Chronicle continues their whitewashing campaigns of certain militant groups such as the PYD as they here. They did this despite having a consensus at that talk page regarding the wording of the relationship between PKK and PYD that was thankfully and very patiently/carefully done through the facilitation and oversight of user El C here.

• Removal of sourced content in an effort to whitewash here and here.
• See this excerpt from their user page:

An interesting example is [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2020/Candidates/Scottywong/Questions&diff=prev&oldid=990586561&diffmode=source this one], when I asked for the opinion about the ISIS issue of a candidate during the ArbCom elections on the 25th November 2020, the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women. [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2020/Candidates/Scottywong/Questions&diff=990638986&oldid=990586561&diffmode=source This] was their response. The pro-Kurdish AANES, has democratic, gender-egalitarian, women empowering, multicultural policies and the SDF, which includes the YPG, are the armed forces of the AANES.

Use of unreliable sources to push POV

User Paradise Chronicle has used obscure websites as sources to push controversial POV edits. One such edit is here and here to claim the existence of a Kurdish name instead of the millennia-old name of Aintab (Antep or Gaziantep in modern Turkish).

Removal of sourced materials from the Washington Post

Here Paradise Chronicle removed sourced content from the Washington Post and insertion of Citation needed" template instead. Their edit summary said "remove nonsense". They have done this several times at the same page.

Evidence presented by GPinkerton

Thepharoah17 whitewashes Turkish invasion of Syrian Kurdistan

• [68] (Kurdistan Workers' Party)
• [69] (Rojava–Kurdistan Region relations)
• [70] (Operation Euphrates Shield)
• [71], [72] (Operation Olive Branch)
• [73] (2019 Turkish offensive into north-eastern Syria)

Thepharoah17 whitewashes Turkish invasions of Turkish Kurdistan, eradicates mentions of the place, and removes Kurdish place names

• [74], [75] (Military History of Turkey)
• [76], [77] (Cizre)
• [78] (Gaziantep)
• [79] (Jaghjagh River)
• [80] (Kurdistan Workers' Party)
• [81] (Mardin Province)
• [82] (Kobanî)
• [83] (History of Diyarbakır)
• [84] (Nusaybin)

Thepharoah17 soapboxes their anti-Kurdish POV

• [85], [86] (Turkish Land Forces: explicit denialist POV "There is no Turkish Kurdistan")
• [87] (Turkish Kurdistan: "there’s no country called Kurdistan")

Thepharoah17 whitewashes ethnic cleansing

• [88] (2019 Turkish offensive into north-eastern Syria)
• [89] (Afrin District)

Thepharoah17 eradicates mentions of Syrian Kurdistan and removes or displaces Kurdish place names

• [90] (Canton (administrative division))
• [91] (Al-Hawl)
• [92] (Al-Hawl refugee camp)
• [93] (Al-Hasakah District)
• [94] (Ain Dara, Aleppo Governorate)
• [95], [96] (Siege of Kobanî)
• [97] (Human rights in the AANES)
• [98] (Rojava conflict)
• [99] (Afrin District)
• [100], [101], [102] (Qamishli)
• [103] (Afrin Canton)
• [104], [105] (Tell Abyad District)
• [106] (Batifa)
• [107] (International Freedom Battalion)
• [108] (Rmelan)
• [109] (Al-Malikiyah)
• [110] (Amuda)

Thepharoah17 and "Northern Iraq"

• [111] (before) [112] (after)
• [113] (Syrian Turkmen)
• [114] (March 1987 Turkish incursion into northern Iraq)
• [115] (Christianity)

Supreme Deliciousness misrepresents sources

• [116] (Talk:Syrian Kurdistan)

Supreme Deliciousness eradicates mentions of (Iraqi) Kurdistan

[117], [118] (Kurdistan TV)

Supreme Deliciousness eradicates mentions of (Syrian) Kurdistan

• [119] (Upper Mesopotamia)

Supreme Deliciousness seeks to remove the names "Syrian Kurdistan" and "Rojava" altogether

• [120], [121], [122], [123]
  • (Supreme Deliciousness's POV-pushing identified by Valereee [124])

عمرو بن كلثوم eradicates mentions of (Syrian) Kurdistan/Kurds and removes Kurdish place names, flags, etc.

• [125] (Jarabulus)
• [126] (Al-Hasakah District)
• [127] (Turkish involvement in the Syrian civil war)
• [128] (Upper_ Mesopotamia)
• [129] (Kurds in Syria)
• [130] (Timeline of Kurdish Uprisings)
• [131] (Rmelan)
• [132] (Afrin District)
• [133], [134] (Amuda)

عمرو بن كلثوم uses contentious think-tank sources

• [135] (on demography of Manbij District)
• [136] (on demography of Qamishli)

عمرو بن كلثوم misrepresents contentious sources (think-tanks, PhD theses)

• [137] (unsourced editorializing on demography of Al Bab)
• [138] (minimizing Kurdish population statistics)

عمرو بن كلثوم seeks to remove the names "Syrian Kurdistan" and "Rojava" altogether

• [139], [140], [141], [142] (Talk:Syrian Kurdistan)
• [143], [144] (Talk:Rojava_conflict)
  • See also: User:عمرو بن كلثوم/Kurdish area

عمرو بن كلثوم canvasses

• [145] (User_talk:HistoryofIran)
• [146] (User_talk:El_C)

عمرو بن كلثوم denies, and misrepresents sources in an attempt to deny, ethnic cleansing in Syrian Kurdistan

• [147]
• [148]
• [149]
  • See also: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Kurds#Denial_of_ethnic_cleansing

عمرو بن كلثوم misrepresents sources in an attempt to delegitimize Kurdish inhabitants of Syrian Kurdistan

The special pleading and tendentious interpretation of weak sources that is emblematic of this editor is again evident. Without justification, عمرو بن كلثوم is:

• 1.) claiming that 53,315 is a smaller number than is 29,769; or 27,316; or 4,200; or 2,181; or 1,602; or 8,767.
  • Clearly this is false.
• 2.) using OR to decide that not one of the 25,000 "nomads" listed in the totals is a Kurd.
  • Clearly this is tendentious POV misinterpretation.
• 3.) using this misconstruction to support an overall campaign to support Ba'athist claims about Syrian Kurdistan, namely that all or most of the Kurds there are illegal immigrants, foreigners, etc., and therefore supporting his (and others') campaign to prove to themselves and the rest of the world that Syrian Kurdistan is not a thing, a point he has argued very hard to enforce on this project, and one very far from supported by reliable sources. That should now be clear to all.

[150], [151], [152], [153], [154], [155], [156], [157] (& vide supra)

Shadow4Dark removes maps of Kurdish-inhabited areas

• [158] (Secession in Turkey)

Further reading

Further evidence of this POV pushing, denialism, and nationalism can be seen in these numerous threads below, as well as on the entire history of Talk:Syrian Kurdistan. I urge particularly that the talk page edits of Supreme Deliciousness and عمرو بن كلثوم be examined.

• Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard/Archive_191#Tell_Abyad (filed by Paradise Chronicle)
• Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_317#Is_a_book_by_the_PhD_candidate_Mustafa_Hamza_a_reliable_source_for_a_denial_of_a_Syrian_Kurdistan? (filed by Paradise Chronicle)
• Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view/Noticeboard/Archive_86#PhD_candidate_as_a_reliable_source_for_a_denial_of_Syrian_Kurdistan_against_the_views_of_multiple_professors_stating_otherwise? (filed by Paradise Chronicle)
• Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1052#User:عمرو_بن_كلثوم_and_Syrian_Kurdistan (filed by GPinkerton)
• Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1052#Unequivocal_TENDENTIOUS_editing_by_عمرو_بن_كلثوم_on_Syrian_Kurdistan (filed by GPinkerton)
• Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1052#Syrian_Kurdistan,_at_war_again (filed by GPinkerton)
• Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1052#Supreme_Deliciousness_and_WP:TENDENTIOUS_editing_on_Syrian_Kurdistan (filed by GPinkerton)
• Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive327#Intractable_problem_still_unaddressed_and_unabated;_administrator_action_deficient (filed by GPinkerton)
• Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive328#Advice_re:_would_we_need_a_new_admin? (filed by Valereee)
  • and section: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive328#ARC_or_ARCA? (filed by Levivich)
• Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive328#Admin_introducing_source_restriction (filed by Supreme Deliciousness)

Coda

Both Supreme Deliciousness and Thepharoah17 have made hundreds of edits removing mentions of Israel from diverse articles. In 2014, Supreme Deliciousness was indefinitely blocked from editing Commons, though was later unblocked, after two previous blocks for POV pushing and for edit warring over a map. In 2009 the same user was topic banned on this project over nationalistic editing. Numerous other blocks for Syria/middle-east POV-pushing/edit warring followed. عمرو بن كلثوم was blocked twice in 2015 for edit warring over Kurd-related topics. Circumstantial evidence of WP:NOTHERE.

Evidence presented by {your user name}

before using the last evidence template, please make a copy for the next person

{Write your assertion here}

Place argument and diffs which support your assertion; for example, your first assertion might be "So-and-so engages in edit warring", which should be the title of this section. Here you would show specific edits to specific articles which show So-and-so engaging in edit warring.

{Write your assertion here}

Place argument and diffs which support the second assertion; for example, your second assertion might be "So-and-so makes personal attacks", which should be the title of this section. Here you would show specific edits where So-and-so made personal attacks.