User:Cvrx

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Hello ;)

I might be here more often, now that my French persona was killed in less than 12 hours on fr.wikipedia, after 9 years of peaceful existence.

Here I come with my history, and the story:

Blocked indefinitely on fr.wikipedia in less than 12 hours with no time to present my defense[edit]

I learned the notion of consensus on fr.wikipedia the hard way. I got blocked for 150 years on 20 June 01:48 (CEST), asked for my unblocking on 20 June 07:38 (CEST), then got indefinitely blocked even on my talk page on 25 June 02:41 (CEST). If you are one against a small united group of contributors and sysadmins, you don't have the right to stand on your disagreement. Otherwise, Death Penalty might be applied upon you, as it happened in my case.

A pack of sysadmins (Azurfrog, Lomita, Treehill), ex-sysadmins (Kirtap, Lebob) and contributors (Fanchb29 – future sysadmin?, Hatonjan), of fr.wikipedia are on a mission: protect WP from the vandalism of François Asselineau fanboys. It is an exhausting job. Well organised Wikipedia:Tag team (WP:TAGTEAM), they don't count the reverts they make to the article, the Bytes they add relentlessly to the talk pages (and to the article), and the contributors they have to block, in order to counter this filthy propaganda. Starting at the 4th failure to delete François Asselineau's English page over here, in March 2012, while the article in French had been safely deleted, they had to come in and relentlessly edit the page so that the innocent reader be preserved from this dangerous Asselineau's propaganda (Azurfrog alone had to make 66 edits, add 18,326 Bytes and suppress 1,785 Bytes on François Asselineau's page here, between March 2012 and October 2014, to convey the correct information, and to severely bully with his pack a dissenting voice – sending D0kkaebi into a maelstrom he will remember all of his life). It requires a 24/24 attention and rapid reaction. Otherwise WP would be flooded by this dangerous propaganda. Those deserve from the Nation, the Republic of Wikipedia, the French Republic, they fight night and days to protect. (So they consider themselves, despite that behaving this way (WP:OWNBEHAVIOR), they trample each and every single of the five pillars of Wikipedia, like the third stating that “no editor owns an article” (WP:OWN) [read PPPPS below].)

On the verge of my ninth anniversary on fr.wikipedia (24 June 2008) (and en.wikipedia — 23 June 2008), for defending my position on a small change of a small paragraph of François Asselineau article [read P5S below], I turned to be, to their eyes, like many others before me, a new avatar of those enemies of mankind. They had to act swifty and hard. on June 19, Fanchb29 and Azurfrog asked for a strong punisment. 10 hours later, Chaoborus blocked me for “150 years”. Then I dared ask, through the tiny space left to me on my talk page, the lift of this punishment. It turned out not to be strong enough. I still could write on my personal talk page. So on June 25, Habertix blocked me everywhere: DEATH PENALTY for me. Over. So much for free speech. I lived for nine years on WP without a qualm, contributing to many touchy subjects. But this event unmasked me as an Asselineau Fan Boy that had to be burned to the ashes…

One thing funny is that they keep accusing François Asselineau and his promoters of being “Conspiracy theorists”. I wonder who is more in the “Conspiracy theory”, when they so overreact against anyone that can be associated with this vilified Asselineau. For Azurfrog's pack, anyone defending a view in favor of Asselineau is considered a “militant asselinesque”, a member of a coordinated militant team, conspiring to corrupt Wikipedia in favor of their guru, that the pack has to block as fast as possible.

One example out of many deranged conspiracy theorist Azurfrog (replying to Deusdet, who became intimidated enough not to come back to the topic again, because he dared replace the title of a section from the judgemental disparaging “Conspirationnisme antiaméricain” to the more factual and neutral “Accusations d'antiaméricanisme et de conspirationnisme”) heavily suggests that Deusdet is part of the Asselineau conspiracy (Azurfrog 11 mars 2017 à 15:48 CET):

Sauf que, comme pourtant déjà dit, c'est juste au moment où vous atteignez les 500 contributions que vous choisissez d'intervenir sur cette page pour y remettre sur le tapis - pour la xe fois - la référence à Rudy Reichstadt et à Conspiracy Watch, c'est à dire comme par hasard la bête noire absolue de François Asselineau..
Ne croyant pas aux coïncidences, je ne peux pas m'empêcher de m'interroger sérieusement et de rester vigilant, à la veille de la campagne présidentielle d'Asselineau.
— Azurfrog, Discussion:François Asselineau, 11 mars 2017 à 15:48 CET

Breach of Wikipedia:Non-discrimination policy (WP:NDP)[edit]

Burning to the stake any supposed Asselineau supporter daring to stand on his position is a hell of a discriminatory policy against a group of people on the ground of their supposed political opinion. It deprives them from the possibility to have a working account on fr.wikipedia.org. However the Wikimedia foundation has a non discrimination policy, WP:NDP:

Wikipedia:Non-discrimination policy

This page documents a Wikipedia policy with legal considerations. The global Non discrimination policy is approved by the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees to apply to all Wikimedia projects. It may not be circumvented, eroded, or ignored by local policies.

The Wikimedia Foundation prohibits discrimination against current or prospective users and employees on the basis of race, color, gender, religion, national origin, age, disability, sexual orientation, or any other legally protected characteristics. The Wikimedia Foundation commits to the principle of equal opportunity, especially in all aspects of employee relations, including employment, salary administration, employee development, promotion, and transfer.

The expression of political opinion is such other legally protected characteristic in the United States, country of the Wikimedia Foundation, by the First Amendment to the Constitution, of 1791:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Political opinion is also an other legally protected characteristic the discrimination against is explicitely prohibited by the Law in France, Code Pénal):

Code pénal

Partie législative
Livre II : Des crimes et délits contre les personnes
Titre II : Des atteintes à la personne humaine
Chapitre V : Des atteintes à la dignité de la personne
Section 1 : Des discriminations
Article 225-1
Modifié par LOI n°2016-1547 du 18 novembre 2016 - art. 86
Constitue une discrimination toute distinction opérée entre les personnes physiques sur le fondement de leur origine, de leur sexe, de leur situation de famille, de leur grossesse, de leur apparence physique, de la particulière vulnérabilité résultant de leur situation économique, apparente ou connue de son auteur, de leur patronyme, de leur lieu de résidence, de leur état de santé, de leur perte d'autonomie, de leur handicap, de leurs caractéristiques génétiques, de leurs mœurs, de leur orientation sexuelle, de leur identité de genre, de leur âge, de leurs opinions politiques, de leurs activités syndicales, de leur capacité à s'exprimer dans une langue autre que le français, de leur appartenance ou de leur non-appartenance, vraie ou supposée, à une ethnie, une Nation, une prétendue race ou une religion déterminée.

Article 225-2
Modifié par LOI n°2012-954 du 6 août 2012 - art. 3
La discrimination définie aux articles 225-1 et 225-1-1, commise à l'égard d'une personne physique ou morale, est punie de trois ans d'emprisonnement et de 45 000 euros d'amende lorsqu'elle consiste :
1° A refuser la fourniture d'un bien ou d'un service ;
2° A entraver l'exercice normal d'une activité économique quelconque ;
3° A refuser d'embaucher, à sanctionner ou à licencier une personne ;

It is also a legaly protected caracteristic by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights proclaimed by the United Nations General Assembly in Paris on 10 December 1948 that prohibits discrimination based on political or other opinion:

Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.

So the systematic exclusion from fr.wikipedia of the supposed Asselineau supporters (those who dare stand for a presentation of François Asselineau in lesser derogatory terms) made by Azurfrog and his fellow sysadmins is a serious violation of the Wikipedia Foundation non discrimination policy.

References[edit]

References (chronological order):
[1] My personal page before annihilation.
[2] My personal talk page before my first blocking on 20 June 01:48 (CEST).
[3] The log of my modifications of the page François Asselineau, the lasts being of this paragraph, on its history, from 16 June 20:46 (CEST) to 17 June 13:27 (CEST).
[4] My tiny argumentation on Fanchb29 talk page on 17 June 2017 10:32 (CEST) and 17 June 2017 10:59 (CEST).
[5] The thread about my proposal for a modification opened by Fanchb29 on 17 June 2017 13:47 (CEST) on the article talk page. (My first publication on this thread on 18 June 2017 16:57 (CEST), my last publication on 19 June 2017 12:52 (CEST)).
[6] The request to the administrators for a punishment opened against me by Fanchb29 on 19 June 2017 13:26 (CEST).
[7] The request to the administrators for a punishment opened against me by Azurfrog on 19 June 2017 14:08 (CEST) (on which I had no time to write for my defense despite my asking for time to Azurfrog on my talk page on 19 June 2017 23:19 (CEST)).
[8] List of my 3 blockings: 20 June 2017 01:48 (CEST) by Chaoborus (complete even on my talk page on ground of “Ne pas désorganiser Wikipédia pour une argumentation personnelle”: CAOU Asselineau), 20 June 2017 03:14 by Chaoborus (lift of the blocking of my talk page), 25 June 2017 02:41 (CEST) by Habertix, on the ground of “Ne pas désorganiser Wikipédia pour une argumentation personnelle”, although I fully respected the advises given in this procedure, and that I proved that I contributed to many other subjects than Asselineau and thus was not CAOU Asselineau.
[9] My asking on Chaoborus English talk page for a lift of the bloking of my talk page, on 20 June 2017 03:05 (CEST).
[10] My personal talk page between the first (20 June 2017 01:48 CEST) and last (25 June 2017 02:41 CEST) blocking: the only place left where I could write, and I did so for my defense!
[11] The thread on the requests to the administrators page about my asking for a lift of the first sanction against me, opened on 20 June 2017 07:48 (CEST).
[12] The thread opened by Azurfrog on the Administrators Bulletin about my asking to be unblocked, on 23 June 2017 11:03 (CEST).
After my total indefinite blocking on fr.wikipedia (25 June 2017 02:41 CEST):
[13] My (post mortem) answer on User talk:Habertix on 25 June 2017 07:33 (CEST) to his saying (“je ne vois rien qui justifierait la levée de ce blocage.”) about my blocking given on the administrators bulletin on 24 June 2017 00:08 (CEST), after he blocked me (on 25 June 2017 02:41 CEST), giving him a reason for and asking him my unblocking (Habertix did not answer but instead erased my edit at 07:19, 1h46' later, not very graceful).
[14] Response to this answer by Azurfrog on my talk page, on 25 June 2017 13:14 (CEST) and my answer.

Happy to talk about all this on my talk page. Cvrx (talk) 20:50, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Later:
[15] My question (in French) to Ruyblas13, the first arbitrator of Prométhé26's case who published his advice, (that the case was non personal thus non admissible), on his argumentation, as I consider the case most personal, given that his own existance was at stake, and his answer, in English, that was not explainatory. Posted on on his talk page on 17:02, 27 August 2017‎ under the title (“Philosophie élémentaire : qu'y a-t-il de plus personnel que l'existence d'une personne ? (Problème de la chasse aux sorcières anti Asselineau sur fr.wikipedia)“. Thread archived by him on 11:26, 28 August 2017‎
[16] My answer to Racconish, another arbitrator of fr.wikipedia, under the header “1) Ted Kennedy editorial conflict resolution on en.wikipedia vs. François Asselineau editorial conflict resolution on fr.wikipedia. 2) Killing someone non personal?” after his two publications on the previous thread on Ruyblas13's talk page, published on Racconish's talk page on 20:48, 29 August 2017‎. He did'nt answer and moved the thread on my own talk page on 09:54, 30 August 2017‎.

Post Scriptum[edit]

PS: WP:USERPAGE[edit]

To those who might object to the above piece of humor commenting on Wikipedia matters on my page, here a quotation of WP:USERPAGE: “What may I have in my user pages?:“ “Non-article Wikipedia material such as reasonable Wikipedia humor, essays and perspectives, personal philosophy, comments on Wikipedia matters“. This is precisely what this piece is about. Cvrx (talk) 12:07, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

PPS: Prométhée26 Begging for Life[edit]

Terror reigns again at the moment on fr.wikipedia: this time against the new supposed Asselineau fanatic Prométhée26 who is begging to be spared from the Guillotine… Cvrx (talk) 21:09, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

PPS2: Poor Prométhée26's Fate[edit]

Poor Prométhée26: not luckier than me, even though he tried to go through all possible conciliation procedures on fr.wikipedia. It ended all the same: assassination before he could present his defence as a last word… Is there something rigged in fr.wikipedia.org?

On 5 July 2017 18:00 (CEST) Starus blocked Prométhée26 indefinitely.

1) He takes part to the thread on Discussion:François Asselineau, about one paragraph of the article, opened by Fanchb29 on 26 June 2017 19:10 (CEST) (exactly as it happened for me).

2) He asks for a mediation because of “une discussion qui commence à s'enliser avec Fanchb29”, giving the version of the contested paragraph proposed by Fanchb29 and his own, on 30 June 2017 14:26 (CEST). The discussion turns into personal attacks against him, culminating with a diatribe of Azurfrog, in his own sub-thread published on 4 July 2017 21:52 (CEST) (just like he did against me with his own sub-thread of the article talk page “Conclusion en forme de proposition”), under the heading “Comment reconnaître un militant asselinesque ?”, that is a call for a witch-hunt. No compromise is looked into in this discussion and no-one comes forward as a mediator.

3) He publishes a request to the administrators against the vandalism of Fanchb29 and Lebob, who unilateraly modified the wording of the paragraph before the end of the discussion about this wording, on 4 July 2017 21:50 (CEST)

4) He presents a request for an arbitrage on 05 July 2017 08H47 (CEST), between himself and Azurfrog who wrote death threats against him (threats of indefinite blocking).

And this falls upon his head. Starus blocks him indefinitely “En accord avec Azurfrog, Hégésippe et Lomita” (i.e. the three administrators hysterical about Asselineau) on 5 July 2017 18:00 (CEST), 9:13 hours after the request, while the rule for the arbitration on fr.wikipedia gives 1 week to decide the admissibility of the request, a period of time one would expect the main person involved to be able to express its opinion!

Without any time given to him to answer to some strange justifications on the inadmissibility given by 3 arbitrators that the conflict “n'est pas d'ordre personnel” (lol: if the death threat executed under the eyes of the arbitrators is not personal matter, what can it be!?) 6 out of 7 arbitrators pronounce the request inadmissible (with the last one writing “De plus, le demandeur a été bloqué indéfiniment, tout à l'heure, par les administrateurs.” Sounds to have a (bizarre) logic: if the one that asked for the arbitration has been put to death, who needs an arbitration any more? Cvrx (talk) 06:53, 6 July 2017 (UTC) On July 6, the remaining arbitrator, like the other 6, pronounced the request inadmissible. Cvrx (talk) 17:03, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

PPPS: Blocking Argumentation's Rebuttal[edit]

[17] Short argumentation about the arguments asserted on my blocking log on fr.wikipedia (in French). Retour sur les arguments de mon blocage définitif figurant sur mon journal de blocages, sur fr.wikipedia (en français) Cvrx (talk) 00:00, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

PPPPS: WP:Five Pillar's Violation[edit]

[18] Just in case it is not clear enough: a reminder (in French) that those that “killed” me on fr.wikipedia break in total impunity each and every one of the Five “pillars“ of Wikipedia. Cvrx (talk) 22:01, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Their behaviour has been very well studied in an article published by Silice on Agoravox on 28 February 2017 : La face sombre de Wikipedia (1) : le cas François Asselineau Cvrx (talk) 00:46, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

Testimony of another “killed” wikipedia contributor, Nicostella (“killed“ on 11 dec 2016) about fr.wikipedia and Asselineau: Journal d'un wikipédien repenti : le cas Asselineau, published on november 2016, before he was “killed”. Cvrx (talk) 09:52, 13 August 2017 (UTC), and:

Systematic discriminatory behavior against pro Asselineau contributors out in the open; A list of contributors ”killed” for supposed “militantisme asselinesque”[edit]

[19] Out in the open: the pack's “policy” to ban indefinitely any perceived pro-Asselineau contributor on the spot. A list of contributors ”killed” for supposed “militantisme asselinesque”. Cvrx (talk) 14:07, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

P5S: Contested Paragraph Successive Published and Proposed Versions[edit]

[20] A view of the dispute limited to the successive versions of the contested paragraph (in French). Cvrx (talk) 12:52, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

P6S: Discussion with two fr.wikipedia arbitrators on their assessment of the conflict between Prométhée26 and Azurfrog[edit]

[21] Discussion with the then arbitrators of fr.wikipedia Ruyblas13 and Racconish, between 27 and 30 August 2017, about their reason to consider the conflict between Prométhée26 and Azurfrog, that was submitted to them by Prométhée26 on 5 July, before he was blocked indefinitely 9 hours later, to be “non personal”. Cvrx (talk) 17:28, 14 October 2017 (UTC)