User talk:Kjartan8

Some help

Hi, I saw your edits to issues related to Direct Action Day and would like to get your attention to a matter of serious misrepresentation:

A new user named

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Teabing-Leigh

has started a bunch of bullshit POV forks based on unreliable pakistani propaganda websites and afrocentric pseudohistory propaganda

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gandhi%27s_racism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahomed_Ali_Jinnah%27s_11th_August_speech http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gandhi%27s_views_on_race

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_League%27s_Civil_Disobedience_Movement http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_League%27s_Direct_Action_Day

are both POV forks of

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_Action_Day

Some of them have been AfD'ed, but others remain.I suggest in the strongest terms that these articles be deleted immediately. The references cited in Direct Action Day by this editor are falsely represented by him and not in the citations given (I am well-familiar with them). In contrast, he has removed numerous references that did, in fact, exist before that were reliable.

In particular, this website: http://www.cwo.com/~lucumi/gandhi.html

cited by him across these numerous articles,

Is an Afrocentric pseudohistory website with no mainstream credibility.

Thanks for your attention. Kjartan8 12:37, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

I thank you for your mail message. However, I think that the community of wikipedians are intelligent to understand the issues involved and over a period of time the collective efforts shall prevail to build encyclopedic contents. As such, no direct intervention is required in my opinion. --Bhadani (talk) 13:24, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Please do not make any further edits to Direct Action Day per my request on it's talk page. If you make any further edits, Teabing will also edit and we'll not get any closer to resolution. If you feel this is an unreasonable request, state why ion the articles talk page. The Kinslayer 11:16, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Reply

No troubles. Usually, we discourage cross-posting of problems across several boards, as it's often seen as a form of forum shopping. You did right by filing under WP:SSP, that's where we investigate cases of potential sockpuppet abuse, including socks used to violate the 3RR. It's been a bit backlogged, but I'm getting through them, and your case will get looked at. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 08:29, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

disruptive editor

Could you please contribute to persuading this editor [1] to stop inserting original research statements and violating WP:Point on Direct Action Day? He seems quite determined to attack the article. He seems to basically be the same as Teabing-leigh. Kjartan8 06:46, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Development:He has violated WP:3RR on Direct Action Day with 4 reverts. I have reported him to 3RR as seems to be the procedure. I am new so could you please check my report to see if it's ok? Kjartan8 07:04, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Development: he appears to have a sock puppet named YLH which he is now using to bypass 3rr and has gone to 6 reverts, removing my tags and all. How to complain about this? Please assist me. Kjartan8 07:40, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Development: I have started Wikipedia:Suspected_sock_puppets/Teabing-Leigh. Is this okay? Please comment. Kjartan8 08:05, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

It is getting late in India - almost mid night. I will try to talk next day if I find time. Thanks. --Bhadani (talk) 20:00, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I will try to look into the issues soon. I have to move to my Office early as today is the last day of the India's financial year. Thanks. --Bhadani (talk) 02:01, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

I saw the comments. Though I have completed 2 years at Wikipedia, still I am not very familiar with many processes of wikipedia. I suggest you to request another administrator - there are many who are expert of such affairs. I regret my inability. However, I would suggest that with cool discussion and sometimes moving to other pages for few weeks make the issues settle down to a more rationale level though I am not sure. However, my comments should not be taken as de-motivating: wikipedia is so big that one may always find other pages to work on. Thanks. --Bhadani (talk) 15:13, 31 March 2007 (UTC)