User talk:BKLisenbee

Re DB-user and User:BKLisenbee see User:FayssalF/JK

User:BKLisenbeehas been involved in on going edit wars and character assassination. This noticifation arises after refusing to mediate. See User:FayssalF/JK.Opiumjones 23 (talk) 02:08, 21 December 2007 (UTC) be aware[reply]

block this user

see below

User:Opiumjones 23 03:34, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

this users sock page

and His sock puppets

User:Opiumjones 23 03:44, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re BKLisenbee

What should be done about BKLisenbee ? His POV has been gone into at length. So who shall block and revert his serial edits on the concerned pages?

See

BKLisenbee POV edit history

and His sock puppets

His recent edits are an attempt to erase facts and history prior to his client visiting Canada next month. Therefore he is using this site as a public relations tool. Pls advise.

See Please have a look at User:FayssalF/JK

added comment from other user

I wanted to let you know that this Jajouka/Joujouka dust-up has been ongoing for quite some time. This BKLisenbee fellow is one of the long-term combatants in an extra-Wikipedia fight over who is the legitimate heir to the musical traditions of ancient Morocco. There are a number of partisans in the issue here in the US, as well as Ireland, Great Britain, and Morocco itself. I take no side on the matter, and my only concern is the accuracy of articles related to the subject. But, long-term edit warring has been the scenario. Attempts at reconciliation have failed. I felt you should be aware of this. Cheers! ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 16:37, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

User:Opiumjones 23 17:27, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Opiumjones 23 16:47, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jajouka (not Joujouka) and Master Musicians of Jajouka (not Master Musicians of Joujouka)

FayssalF:

There is a problem with redirecting from Jajouka to Joujouka and from Master Musicians of Jajouka to Master Musicians of Joujouka.

I have looked on the MSN Encarta Encylopedia and found the Moroccan village listed there as Jajouka. It is not Joujouka. Here is the link showing the correct spelling as Jajouka: encarta

There is only one official site: www.jajouka.com and not (joujouka.net).

Does this help? When will someone at Wikipedia, an administrator or editor fix this redirection? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by BKLisenbee (talk • contribs) 20:41, 9 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Hi BKLisenbee. I am really confused. This issue is really bothering me a lot. I've semi-protected both Joujouka and The Master Musicians of Joujouka hoping contributors would use the talk pages to discuss the issues. I am not sure what to do, really. Discussions at talk pages would really help me sort this out for you. Coudl you please post some of your concerns re these articles at their respective talk pages? Cheers -- Szvest - ^{Wiki me up ®} 10:24, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sir, when you try to "discuss" the Jajouka / Joujouka mess with you come up with Frank Rynne's name as and that seems to be the problem. No one can do anything until you allow others to actually to actually talk to someone who realizes it is hijacking the name of Jajouka and turning it into Joujouka or Master Musicians of Joujouka. This is not a balanced way of dealing with the issue and goes contrary to Wikipedia's philosophy of fairness to all.—Preceding unsigned comment added by BKLisenbee (talk • contribs)

BKLisenbee. If you read my message above carefully you'd understand that i am not supporting any of the versions. What i am supporting in to see all parties discussing these issues at talk pages. I'd happily help moderate the discussion but someone needs to start it as i already did my part (protecting articles for the same reason) and waiting a reaction from your part at the talk pages. Once the matter is sorted out, i'll obviously un-protect the articles. Otherwise, i'll be bold and deal with this issue tomorrow as you already gave me the Encarta link. Cheers -- Szvest - ^{Wiki me up ®} 19:00, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear All,user BK lisenbee knows full well that there have been two groups of musicians from Zahjouka (the name used by the local Caid and officials) one Master Musicians of Joujouka who have just releasd yet another Cd. The other grouyp is Master Musicians of Jajouka featuring Bachir Attar. The latter have been involved in a long dispute with both the villagers and the late Mohamed Hamri. The Joujouka spelling was the earliest used in the West and was used since the sixties by the group on joujouka.net. I suggest a seperate page for Master Musicians of Jajouka featuring Bachir Attar as they have substanially different notion of the history of the group. IE all references to Hamris role in the both groups history will be removed. This was demonstrated by the reissue of the Brian Jones album in 1995 when the sleave notes of Brion Gysin who was dead at the time were altered by Mr. Attar so as to leave out Gysin's ref to Hamri as being the person who introduced him to Joujouka. They also CHANGED THE SPELLING from the original 1971 release so this is an old problem. User:Opiumjones 23 19:16, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

indeed he notes this in his tags on edits see his contributions Opiumjones 23 (talk) 02:23, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please add yourself to the disambiguation assent request at article talk page

I discovered a poll at "The Master Musicians of Joujouka" talk page regarding disambiguating, which means "splitting into separate articles" for this piece. You are mentioned by the administrator on that page. Normally experienced administrators or editors are not so timid about this process and do not wait for people to post their assent, but he called for people involved in the Talk Page to give their assent, so please log in some time and list your view on disambiguation if you ever happen to see this message. It seems to me the broader "Master Musicians of Jajouka" name as used in allmusic.com should be listed for article mentioning the major label artists and "Master Musicians of Joujouka" for the Sub Rosa group article. See the bottom of the talk page, unless by the time you see this message the article has already been split by the administrator. Emerman 17:09, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I notice just now that you have replied to the item I mentioned above. For reference, it is good to end a reply with the signature using the 4 tilde ~ marks rather than put it at the beginning. You could begin the item by putting [Reply by BKLisenbee]: at the beginning if you feel a need to mark a new reply for some reason at the beginning. Also, sometimes people indent new items using colon : marks (as I did in this indented reply to myself) and a space before the beginning of an entry but your reply is not a reply to someone else so you are ok with not indenting. When people list their vote often they would normally deliniate themselves by starting with an asterisk * and a space but nobody else did that so I guess you don't need to either. But I would recommend putting your signature at the end instead of the beginning of your reply because people might think someone is speaking to you as in "BKLisenbee, ..." instead of realizing you are signing your reply since signatures normally go at the beginning. Just a note since I am gathering that you are possibly new to wikipedia. Welcome to wikipedia. Emerman 21:14, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

POV comments?

You continue to remove my comments which have proven your business and other relationships to the subjects you have been editing. Stop this or I will seek to have you blocked. It is not acceptable behaviour.

Just admit the PoV and only edit on pages not directly related to your business and personal life. In the mean time until other users can see and comment on your POV I shall repost and revert your editing of me on. Please behave corrrectly.

Abelelkrim 18:22, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And YOU have no POV? At least get your facts straight and please that Administrator Fayssal and others have already concurred that NO brink.com or thehandstand.org and unverifiable blog links may be used on Wikipedia.

BKLisenbee 18:22, 03 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Block

I've blocked you form editing temporarily for your disruptive behaviour, including deleting another editor's comments from article Talk pages. When the block expires, please edit responsibly, and with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

Note also that removing links to sites with which you disagree is not acceptable. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 14:01, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Warnings by Administrators at Wikipedia are ignored by user Frankrynne, OpiumJones_23 and Abelelkrim

you have started your pov editing again. This needs to be flagged to a higher authority . In the meantime please note the below and check the links that the admin removed. They were the ones re complaints against you

Abelelkrim 22:30, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Administration believes that comments by user Frankrynne, aka user Opiumjones_23 have been totally inappropriate, with personal information, addresses, threats, are Wikipedia policy, not merely guidelines. Warnings to them have been repeatedly ignored and they have persisted to the point of legal threats and harassment, even via e-mails. I have asked that they be permanently banned for personal attacks.

BKLisenbee 10:26, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:HARRASS

Hi Abelelkrim. I've just removed here and here two of your comments re User:BKLisenbee as they are part of WP:HARRASS. Those comments got nothing to do w/ Wikipedia and are considered personal information totally unrelated and irrelevant to the encyclopaedia. Apart from that you and we have no knowledge if the information gotten from a blog (blogs are not acceptable as a source in wikipedia) concern the user in question.

Please read the policy carefully and avoid doing it next time. If you have posted it somewhere else in Wikipedia, i urge you to remove them immediately. Thanks. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 17:45, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Abelelkrim 22:31, 6 May 2007 (UTC) ,[reply]

An informal mediation process

Hi BKLisenbee. Please have a look at User:FayssalF/JK. Your participation would be highly appreciated. Cheers. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 13:58, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Burroughs letter

Greetings: I think the external link to Burroughs' letter would be more appropriate on one of the Jajouka/Joujouka related articles (if it really needs to be on Wikipedia at all). If you're trying to add information to Wikipedia based on the letter, then better to add some text and cite the letter. Thanks for your consideration. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 15:16, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, talk pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments, as you did at User talk:Gyrofrog, is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 20:10, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What should be done about BKLisenbee ? His POV has been gone into at length. So who shall block and revert his serial edits on the concerned pages?

See

His POV edit history

and His sock puppets

His recent edits are an attempt to erase facts and history prior to his client visiting Canada next month. Therefore he is using this site as a public relations tool. Pls advise.

See Please have a look at User:FayssalF/JK

User:Opiumjones 23 16:49, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Important

Please refer to this. Thanks. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 20:47, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been both blocked from editing Wikipedia for a period of 1 week because of disruption and sockpuppetry. This is you and this is him. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 03:51, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

so now let~'s revert this user

User:Opiumjones 23 00:17, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

POV of User Opiumjones 23 and Harrassment, Threats, Personal info & False Comments by user Frankrynne

Again, User:Opiumjones 23, aka User:Frankrynne, and User:Abelelkrim, seem(s) to think that taking one paragraph of a basically favorable article makes the leader of the one and only Master Musicians of Jajouka "non-Halal", making Vodka drinking another smear in his efforts to discredit him and the Master Musicians of Jajouka. This trivia has nothing to do with this dispute. However, I hope these users (nondeclared sockpuppets?) will be permanently banned from further editing on Wikipedia.

I will have nothing to do with this/these individual, who presumes that he knows me well, when in fact, he does not. We met once or twice briefly, but his threats, insinuations, personal information, e-mail harassments, and other trivia added violate the rules of Wikipedia only prove his POV, which he is always accusing me of. He can't even spell correctly half of the time. User Frankrynne drags in trivia and other individuals have nothing to do with this dispute adding such personal insinuations such as "sexually" involved with, "partner", "commercially involved", etc.. He has even dragged in Elvis, French legal cases, etc., and other matters trying to justify his regular abuse of Wikipedia on his Joujouka problem. This is part of his campaign of personal harrassment. Unfortunately, this is harming the reputation of living persons, and making a mess and creating further confusion on Jajouka, the Master Musicians of Jajouka, William S. Burroughs, Brion Gysin, even on his own page user Frankrynne has removed the letter from William S. Burroughs, who wrote and signed a letter stating that he regarded Bachir Attar as the only 'rightful leader' and that Bachir Attar's Master Musicians of Jajouka was the ONLY true and rightful Joujouka/Jajouka group. Yes, Burroughs did at first spell the name of the village and music group as Joujouka, and yes, so did Brion Gysin, and the original Pipes of Pan LP, however, it was the Rolling Stones who own the copyright on this music, and they permitted the change to the far more common Jajouka spelling. I rest my case. NOTE TO USER FRANKRYNNE: Please do not edit this comment or it will be promptly reported to administrators and I will send a copy to the Wikimedia and Wikipedia Foundation in Florida also. BKLisenbee 09:14, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BKLisenbee 10:41, 03 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re your edits

The Brian Jones Lp page is not a split page it represents the LP and the controversial Cd reissue. Therefore pls consider before editing again.

User:Opiumjones 23 (talk) 01:29, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Incidents reported to ANI

Hi Kenneth. I've just informed the ANI about what's going on. I hope some admins would come for help as it seems that one admin cannopt be here all the time. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 18:07, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello BKLisenbee

Hi BKLisenbee. Could you please have a look at this proposal? Thanks in advance. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 18:57, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BKL RE: your edits on the page of Frank Rynne

Hi BKLisinbee. I have undone your edits on the page of Frank Rynne. Those are perfectly legitimate links that you have removed. Do this again and I will have no choice but to report this. Other administratoers have agreed with the validity of these links.Hannahdolly (talk) 18:29, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

3RR rule is operable here User:Opiumjones 23 (talk) 00:20, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And what about you ALL? 3RR rule is also actionable. Have you not been reminded by Administrator FayssalF that those links are not "legitimate" and they are written by or about you and "Joujouka"? Nor will I EVER agree to any mediation, formal or otherwise, if Tualal (below) is involved, as he clearly threatened a former user Emerman with legal action. I do not feel that that his participation would be appropriate since he is a lawyer who has threatened in the past on this issue. As to your removal or the letter from Willilam S. Burroughs regarding the real Jajouka, and their true leader Bachir Attar, and your removal of the James Grauerhauser letter to you and your friend regarding Jajouka on your own Wikipedia page, and your re-adding the Brink.com, thehandstand.org and other links when you have been told they are not to be used, I want NOTHING TO DO with any mediation until this matter is resolved by higher ups in Administration. You have harrassed me and writen nasty threatening e-mails, and these have all been forwarded to Wikimedia and an administration at Wikipedia. BKLisenbee 13:27, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

your edits continue to violate this site's policies. You refuse mediation. What next? You should mediate, retire or be blocked permanentlyOpiumjones 23 (talk) 01:35, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

again violations of WP:BLP at [1] etc Opiumjones 23 (talk) 01:38, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreement to formal mediation

Hi BKLisinbee, I just wanted to let you know I have agreed to formal mediation over the Joujouka matter, along with others. I would really appreciate it if you would participate too, as I believe we cannot proceed without you, in all fairness, to resolving this dispute. This represents a long awaited opportunity for making real progress here, and I for one am grateful there for all the kind supervision being offered. Tuathal (talk) 12:18, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: request for speedy deletion of this user talk page by owner

User talk pages are not speedy deletable unless WP:BLP issues are claimed. Refer to WP:MFD. JERRY ^talk _contribs 02:23, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Your Re-versions and Deletions

Please mediate and prove your issue in that forum!!!! edit warring is against site rules. You can not advocate for your employer and neighbour Bachir Attar and pretend you are an ordinary Joe who happened upon Wikipedia with grave concerns . If you are not constructive then you are destructive towards this project. At least your 18 socks seem quite Opiumjones 23 (talk) 23:33, 13 January 2008 (UTC) below admin invite in case you have not seen[reply]

Proposal for a formal dispute resolution

This issue needs to be sorted out for once and i am afraid one admin cannot be able to catch up on all what's going on. I've been thinking of making this process a formal one. In other words --> WP:MEDIATION. Any ideas or objections guys? -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 18:35, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Opiumjones 23 (talk) 23:39, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I take it that you still refuse mediation?

Opiumjones 23 (talk) 20:39, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Now that you are back mediation or arb com?

mediate?

Opiumjones 23 (talk) 00:24, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

no no please deal with this in mediation or arbitration but dont run wild

re your recent edits etc.............

Opiumjones 23 (talk) 00:25, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

running wild edits

you must mediate there is no other option except arbcom so one or the other asap

Opiumjones 23 (talk) 03:30, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Topic ban

A notice. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 11:05, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the topic ban (link, link, link etc.). If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Gyrofrog (talk) 14:38, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See also: WP:AN. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 14:38, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

The reason I have edited is because you are not getting accurate edits from anyone else regarding the Master Musicians of Jajouka, and I have the full support of the group's manager. Someone keeps botching up Paul Bowles as well. I have very conscientiously edited and am careful. Furthermore, no one else has been ensuring that these are fair and unbiased, and if I am banned, then so should Pico and Opiumjones_23, who have axes to grind. Please ask administrator FayssalF to contact me via e-mail so we can straighten this out. Meanwhile, who is ensuring that these pages are accurate? It is not the administration of Wikipedia. I ask immediate reinstatement, and if you wish support, just ask Fayssal if my edits are unwarranted.

Decline reason:

Per Gyrofrog below; your request confirms your WP:COI. — Sandstein 16:15, 7 August 2008 (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.

Comment: FayssalF was clear that both you and Opiumhones 23 (also indefinitely blocked) are banned from these topics. Note to reviewing admins: See also WP:AN -- Gyrofrog (talk) 16:12, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notice regarding any further unblock requests: Checkuser has just confirmed that the IP addresses User:41.249.115.40 User:196.206.80.236 User:196.206.86.51 have been used by this user to violate the topic ban and possibly frame User:Opiumjones 23. Please consider this when reviewing further unblock requests. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 02:06, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that these anonymous IP edits listed are not mine. I was signed in at all times as BKLisenbee. I have been in communication with FayssalF, and supplied further information about changes what changes still need to be made on several Wikipedia articles. --maroc 10:37, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Jajouka/Joujouka

Hi BKLisenbee,

As discussed via e-mails, I've unblocked your account in order for both of you to pursue further mediation and assisted editing. Please refer to this AN notice. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 11:49, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

JK

Hi BKLisenbee. Could you please restrict your edits to FayssalF/JK?

Please remove your last post to Talk:Master Musicians of Jajouka Featuring Bachir Attar and put it aside at your talk page or sandbox meanwhile we deal with other articles. We are now fixing Bachir Attar article at FayssalF/JK. Thanks. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 23:55, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

See [2] re recenting edits that appear to be made by you using anon Florida IP Catapla (talk) 12:22, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion 2

You have been mentioned in this discussion [3]

Catapla (talk) 17:51, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

February 2011

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 23:41, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

March 2011

Informational note: this is to let you know that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Regards, -- Gyrofrog (talk) 17:32, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:15, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, BKLisenbee. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, BKLisenbee. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Walter Burton Harris

Assuming that the IP address was you, don't remove sourced material. If you want a change, discuss it on the Talkpage and seek consensus. Harris' homosexuality is well-attested, and the source which you claim is "non-existent" clearly does exist. KJP1 (talk) 07:13, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]