Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:59, 14 December 2015

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Misplaced Pages. When you add content to talk pages and Misplaced Pages pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 21:02, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

ANI Notice

There is currently a discussion on WP:ANI in which you have been mentioned. This is left as a courtesy notification. RickinBaltimore (talk) 19:19, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

December 2015

There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. The section is "new user Hassan Rebell mass nominating articles for deletion on Kurds."

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

Request reason:

I am here to contribute to wikipedia. I have created and expanded many other articles as an IP editor. I also had a previous account that I had to forego because of a username clash. Jzg knows this.

Normally I edit as IP but had to create an account because it is not possible to edit at AFD with an IP only unfortunately. The real issue at AFD was that a single user wrote a mass of non-notable articles (and almost all at AFD agreed that the articles were NOT notable) - as another user said I should have nominated them all into a single nomination. So far almost everyone (over 90 percent) at AFD agreed that the articles are indeed not notable based on[REDACTED] policy. Another editor has not been assuming good faith.

Jzg is not an uninvolved admin and therefore he should not have blocked me - isn't it against the[REDACTED] rule if you get blocked by an involved admin. In fact Jzg knows this but he had disputes with me previosuly as he had with many other users ( User:Kirill Lokshin User:Petri Krohn User:DtobiasUser:MichaelQSchmidt User:Harej User:Cla68 for example). Jzg had a conflict of interest with me already previously. He was in past conflicts and disputes taking side against me, for example he nominated for deletion an article I created. As an involved admin, he should not block me, certainly not without warning.

When unblocked, I will agree to not nominate more than a defined number of articles at AFD. The reason I nominated the articles is that single user wrote a mass of non-notable articles - and over 90 percent at AFD agreed they were not notable. Hassan Rebell (talk) 19:27, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Notes:

• In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
• Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=:I am here to contribute to wikipedia. I have created and expanded many other articles as an IP editor. I also had a previous account that I had to forego because of a username clash. Jzg knows this. :Normally I edit as IP but had to create an account because it is not possible to edit at AFD with an IP only unfortunately. The real issue at AFD was that a single user wrote a mass of non-notable articles (and almost all at AFD agreed that the articles were NOT notable) - as another user said I should have nominated them all into a single nomination. So far almost everyone (over 90 percent) at AFD agreed that the articles are indeed not notable based on[REDACTED] policy. Another editor has not been assuming good faith. :Jzg is not an uninvolved admin and therefore he should not have blocked me - isn't it against the[REDACTED] rule if you get blocked by an involved admin. In fact Jzg knows this but he had disputes with me previosuly as he had with many other users ( ] ] ]] ] ] for example). Jzg had a conflict of interest with me already previously. He was in past conflicts and disputes taking side against me, for example he nominated for deletion an article I created. As an involved admin, he should not block me, certainly not without warning. :When unblocked, I will agree to not nominate more than a defined number of articles at AFD. The reason I nominated the articles is that single user wrote a mass of non-notable articles - and over 90 percent at AFD agreed they were not notable. ] (]) 19:27, 14 December 2015 (UTC) |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=:I am here to contribute to wikipedia. I have created and expanded many other articles as an IP editor. I also had a previous account that I had to forego because of a username clash. Jzg knows this. :Normally I edit as IP but had to create an account because it is not possible to edit at AFD with an IP only unfortunately. The real issue at AFD was that a single user wrote a mass of non-notable articles (and almost all at AFD agreed that the articles were NOT notable) - as another user said I should have nominated them all into a single nomination. So far almost everyone (over 90 percent) at AFD agreed that the articles are indeed not notable based on[REDACTED] policy. Another editor has not been assuming good faith. :Jzg is not an uninvolved admin and therefore he should not have blocked me - isn't it against the[REDACTED] rule if you get blocked by an involved admin. In fact Jzg knows this but he had disputes with me previosuly as he had with many other users ( ] ] ]] ] ] for example). Jzg had a conflict of interest with me already previously. He was in past conflicts and disputes taking side against me, for example he nominated for deletion an article I created. As an involved admin, he should not block me, certainly not without warning. :When unblocked, I will agree to not nominate more than a defined number of articles at AFD. The reason I nominated the articles is that single user wrote a mass of non-notable articles - and over 90 percent at AFD agreed they were not notable. ] (]) 19:27, 14 December 2015 (UTC) |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=:I am here to contribute to wikipedia. I have created and expanded many other articles as an IP editor. I also had a previous account that I had to forego because of a username clash. Jzg knows this. :Normally I edit as IP but had to create an account because it is not possible to edit at AFD with an IP only unfortunately. The real issue at AFD was that a single user wrote a mass of non-notable articles (and almost all at AFD agreed that the articles were NOT notable) - as another user said I should have nominated them all into a single nomination. So far almost everyone (over 90 percent) at AFD agreed that the articles are indeed not notable based on[REDACTED] policy. Another editor has not been assuming good faith. :Jzg is not an uninvolved admin and therefore he should not have blocked me - isn't it against the[REDACTED] rule if you get blocked by an involved admin. In fact Jzg knows this but he had disputes with me previosuly as he had with many other users ( ] ] ]] ] ] for example). Jzg had a conflict of interest with me already previously. He was in past conflicts and disputes taking side against me, for example he nominated for deletion an article I created. As an involved admin, he should not block me, certainly not without warning. :When unblocked, I will agree to not nominate more than a defined number of articles at AFD. The reason I nominated the articles is that single user wrote a mass of non-notable articles - and over 90 percent at AFD agreed they were not notable. ] (]) 19:27, 14 December 2015 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

Jzg is an involved admin

Jzg had a conflict of interest with me already previously. He was in past conflicts and disputes taking side against me, for example he nominated for deletion an article I created. As an involved admin, he should not block me, certainly not without warning.

Comments

As one of at least two objecting editors (@Wikimandia:) I'd be wary about the claim that "over 90 percent at AFD agreed they were not notable." As far as I know, these Afds are still ongoing and he has no way to responsibly make that claim. He's also been rather clear above that, if unblocked, he intends to resume mass nominating all Kurdish-related articles created by @Vekoler: -- though there has never been any community consensus to do so, far as I know, and I wonder why that isn't harassment. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:35, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

90 percent is roughly true for the current status. Wikimandia has voted keep on one of the articles, Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Dilshad Said, but unfortunately Wikimandia was not arguing based on[REDACTED] policy, whereas I and other voters (including in some cases you) were arguing based on available reliable sources and the notability policy. Wikimandia is voting keep on Dilshad Said, a music teacher with no published CDs on Amazon and no reliable sources in the article or on GNews.

Again you are not assuming good faith as previously. I will not nominate all articles created by Vekoler, but the fact is that he created a mass of non-notable articles, and someone had to sift through them to filter out the non-notable ones. That is why there is an AFD process on wikipedia, isn't it? Why should one set of non-notable articles be excluded from AFD? --Hassan Rebell (talk) 20:45, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

BTW, to my surprise I find myself advocating on his behalf in one respect: he's admitted in the past that he had edited as an IP. In fact, he stated here that User:81.62.246.169 is himself. That said, I do not believe he is here to build an encyclopedia -- and I for one don't see the "sifting" that he speaks of -- but I don't believe he's attempted to conceal anything about his IP editing past. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:49, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Of course I didn't nominate all the articles this SPA created at AFD. Some of them were notable enough. But many were just not notable and many other experienced editors have agreed on that point. I have now also come to the conclusion that one of the articles I nominated is notable despite that I couldn't find anything about him on GBooks or Amazon - after references were included in the article that were missing previously.

I have also expanded and created many articles previously like the article on Banaz Mahmood or the Kurdish women article, to name but a few. --Hassan Rebell (talk) 20:58, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

• Requests for unblock