User talk:Roobit

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

Sock puppet accusation[edit]

In December 2008 Roobit (talk · contribs) was accused of operating sock puppets. The claim was that Poetcourt1 (talk · contribs) and Belarus2 (talk · contribs) are sockpuppets of Roobit. At the time it was difficult to refute this claim as the real sockmaster was unknown. The issue was finally solved in March, it turned out that the accounts are in fact sockpuppets of Bloomfield (talk · contribs). The related discussion is here: User talk:Alex Bakharev/Archive23#Nazi crimes in Estonia. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 02:04, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

This discussion is not about unblocking Roobit but about clearing this sock puppet mixup. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 06:47, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

What evidence there is to connect Poetcourt1 and Belarus2 with Bloomfield? ΔιγουρενΕμπρος! 08:58, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

If you don't argue for Roobit to be unblocked, I can't see what's the use of raising this issue on every possible occasion? Both Bloomberg and Roobit have been banned, so it's not that important, which sock one of them was using on a particular moment. Let those users rest in peace and deal somewhere else with their beloved Nestor Makhno, Anarchy in the UK or Baltic-Judaeo-Masonic conspirators respectively...--Miacek (t) 04:04, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Arguments not to unblock Roobit[edit]

A number of editors have come here to offer their arguments for not unblocking Roobit. There is however no request to do so or discussion on this subject going on at the moment. The above thread is about sock puppet accusations, posting these arguments there is a disruption. I am moving these comments from the above thread here. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 05:44, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

  • I would object to Roobit being unblocked. He has only made 276 edits in Wikipedia but has managed to be very disruptive, including gross incivility in violation of Wikipedia:DIGWUREN#Editors_warned as recently as December 2008:
10:47, 12 December 2008: "This is of course not how an encyclopedic entry should be structured or look like. It is ideologically so charged, so inflammatory, views expressed are so one-sided, that unless you a Baltic or Estonian ethno-Nazi or its close supporter, the entry is worthless"
10:47, 12 December 2008: "Modern Estonian ethno-Nazis fail to grasp the fact"
02:47, 18 June 2007: "modern day Estonian Nazis"
As well as soap boxing:
Open Letter Appeal on his User page and again in article space article space. --Martintg (talk) 05:10, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
  • Whatever thesis Petri Krohn presents in order to wikilawyer his fascist friend to be unblocked, the fact is that Roobit was first and foremost blocked for soapboxing, hatespeech, propaganda etc. Full stop. His requests for unblock have been rejected at least 3 times already. And he has been banned by the community which fortunately was unanimous that time. Period. --Miacek (t) 09:30, 25 May 2009 (UTC)