Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Boris Stomakhin/Evidence
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Please make a section for your evidence and add evidence only in your own section. Please limit your evidence to a maximum 1000 words and 100 diffs; a shorter, concise presentation is more likely to be effective. Please focus on the issues raised in the complaint and on diffs which illustrate behavior which relates to the issues. If you disagree with some evidence you see here, please cite the evidence in your own section and provide counter-evidence, or an explanation of why the evidence is misleading. Do not edit within the evidence section of any other user. |
Anyone, whether directly involved or not, may add evidence to this page. Please make a header for your evidence and sign your comments with your name.
When placing evidence here, please be considerate of the Arbitrators and be concise. Long, rambling, or stream-of-consciousness rants are not helpful.
As such, it is extremely important that you use the prescribed format. Submitted evidence should include a link to the actual page diff; links to the page itself are not sufficient. For example, to cite the edit by Mennonot to the article Anomalous phenomenon adding a link to Hundredth Monkey, use this form: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anomalous_phenomenon&diff=5587219&oldid=5584644] [1].
This page is not for general discussion - for that, see talk page.
Be aware that Arbitrators may at times rework this page to try to make it more coherent. If you are a participant in the case or a third party, please don't try to re-factor the page, let the Arbitrators do it. If you object to evidence which is inserted by other participants or third parties please cite the evidence and voice your objections within your own section of the page. It is especially important to not remove evidence presented by others. If something is put in the wrong place, please leave it for the Arbitrators to move.
Arbitrators may analyze evidence and other assertions at /Workshop. /Workshop provides for comment by parties and others as well as Arbitrators. After arriving at proposed principles, findings of fact or remedies, Arbitrators vote at /Proposed decision. Only Arbitrators may edit /Proposed decision.
Contents |
[edit] Evidence presented by User:Biophys
[edit] User:Vlad_fedorov has certain WP:CIV issues
Vlad wished me to die [2], claimed that other people are insane [3] [4], he made conspiracy accusations [5] [6], offensive claims of ethnic nature [7], he claimed that others are "liars" (see edit summaries) [8] [9]; or falsificators [10] [11] [12] [13] [14], he accused me of "inciting ethnic hatred" [15], made various threats (see edit summaries) [16] [17] and he made some comments that are even difficult to categorize [18] [19].
[edit] User:Vlad_fedorov was engaged in wikistalking
I believe that major problem is Vlad's alleged wikistalking. After our content disagreement in article Boris Stomakhin, Vlad started re-editing my edits in other articles that I created (Glasnost Defense Foundation, Moscow Serbsky Institute, Yevgenia Albats, David Satter, Grigory Pasko, Grigory Svirsky, Criminal gang from Lubyanka, Operation Sarindar, Blowing up Russia: Terror from within), that I significantly extended from stub level (Human rights in Russia, Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation, Active measures, Galina Starovoitova, Anatoliy Golitsyn), or visibly edited (Anna Politkovskaya,Yulia Latynina, Russia and the Arab-Israeli conflict,GRU, Russian apartment bombings,Mitrokhin Archive).
It is noteworthy that Vlad created no new articles and edited few articles except those mentioned above. So, he obviously followed my edits. But was it real wikistalking, that is following other people only to create distraction? Often it was not, and he made legitimate although POV edits. But often he simply deleted a perfectly sourced text or inserted poorly sourced libelous statements in BLPs. It would be too laborious to describe all such cases, so I can only give a few examples to establish his behavior pattern.
Example 1. Article Nikolai Koltsov. Vlad asked me to provide exact citation of a source, and I provided it: [20] Obviously, a review from Nature (journal) (Nature Reviews Genetics) is a reliable source, and the cited information is relevant, since it is about death of a person described in his biography. I explained this to Vlad several times:[21] [22] . However Vlad ignored all arguments [23] and reverted me at least 16 times [24].
Example 2. Article David Satter. Vlad rejects the fact that certain words are written in the source [25]. I am trying to expain that even titles of chapters in the book ("Homo soveticus" and "criminalization of conscience") are consistent with my text, but nothing helps: [26]. Please see this [27] as an example of fruitless negotiations with Vlad. Another similar case is Lubyanka_Criminal_Group. Vlad insists that I can not summarize content of a book in the WP article about this book [28], so I am simply afraid to edit anything.
Example 3. Article Political_repression_of_cyber-dissidents. He deletes well sourced and relevant text many times: [29], [30]. [31] Why? It does not matter for him. Sometimes he simply claims a nonsense: like "Trepashkin is not a blogger", although Trepashkin was never mentioned in this article: [32] [33]
Example 4. Article Union_of_Councils_for_Soviet_Jews. He deletes well sourced text atleast 17 times: [34]. Why? His argument: "stalking by Biophys and reintroduction of unsupported statements" [35]. But as clear from this diff, both deleted statements by UCSJ are supported by reliable sources, one - official website of this organization, and another is official testimony in US Congress.
Example 5. Deletion of the entire large "criticism" section from FSB article [36]. The article had 65 references before his intervention, and only 9 references after his deletion. So, he deleted a text supported by 56 references. The text was relevant because it described criticism of FSB operations in the article about FSB.
Example 6. He removes key segment of text with a reference to a scholarly book written by an expert Yossef Bodansky [37] in an article about alleged Russian special forces operation. This segment is still deleted.
Example 7. Vlad delets all information perceived him as negative about GRU. The deleted text includes many different statements on many different subjects; all supported by numerous references to reliable sources [38],[39]. His argument: "obvious hoax and unsupported anti-russian propaganda" (see his edit summary) instead of simply telling: "I do not like it".
Example 8 Deletion of sourced text from article Mitrokhin Archive without asking anyone. His argument: "It is a review for another book The Sword and the Shield". He probably has no idea that The Sword and the Shield is the most important published part of this Achieve [40]. But why does he bother about "Mitrokhin Archive" if he never read it? The only logical answer is wikistalking.
Example 9 Grigory Svirsky. Vlad deletes important information supported by several sources, but he claims that real "vandal" is his opponent (see edit summary) [41]. He does this 8 times [42]. I guess that direct citation of WW II veteran Grigory Svirsky deleted by Vlad may be of interest for WP users: "It seems that offending, betraying, or even "murdering" people in the virtual space is easy. This is like killing an enemy in a video game: one do not see a disfigured body or eyes of the person who is dying right in front of you. However, human soul lives by its own basic laws that force it to pay the price for the virtual crime in his real life" (sorry if my translation was not good).
Example 10. When I helped User:Colchicum with formatting his articles, Vlad started following his edits too. Colchicum asked Alex Bakharev for an informal mediation, but Vlad did not want to listen and only blamed others as liars or worse [43]. Colchicum filed an RfC comment about Vlad's alleged wikistalking, and I supported his RfC. Please see Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Vlad_fedorov.
Example 11. In retaliation, Vlad submitted another RfC claiming that real wikistalker is me. This claim is hardly appropriate because all articles in question were created or expanded by me, whereas Vlad was coming only later to "censor" me [44].
Example 12. Vlad follows other users (see his edit summary): [45]. His edit may or may not be legitimate. But Vlad tells: "Ultramarine you reinsert criticized Black Book of Communism in Tambov rebellion and delete reliable sources on criticism here?" (so Vlad is coming after Ultramarine to "get even"). This looks like a clear vengeance pattern, something very similar to this (see edit summary) :[46] : "Bullying me with your friend Colchicum, Biophys? Perhaps I should file RfC on Colchicum, I am sure I would find second signature needed. So if you care about your friend?", he said.
As you can see, I honestly tried to negotiate with Vlad about every article. I proposed Vlad to "stay out of each other's edits" to defuse the situation, but Vlad refused [47]. Such compromise solution would treat Vlad and me completely equal. I repeated this offer during mediation and this RfA [48], but Vlad did not reply. Moreover, I warned Vlad many times that he is engaged in vandalism and wikistalking - at his talk page, at talk pages of articles, RfC, and edits summaries. However, this did not help at all. He did not want to listen even most friendly advice [49] [50] Biophys 21:54, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Threats by User:ellol
Ellol was also involved in this story, since he submitted an RfC about me together with Vlad. At first, he came uninvited to my talk page and suggested that I need to educate myself [51], posted science fiction with description of arrest and torture [52], and patriotic Russian poetry [53]
Then he posted a strongly anti-Putin statement at my talk page (he always uses Russian) and asked if I agree or not: [54]. The inflamatory statement asserts that: (a) Putin's regime must be annihilated by force because (b) Russian state was usurped by a gang of former KGB officers who are real "fascists" (meaning that FSB members hold strongly nationalistic views and covertly promote Russian nationalism). I strongly disagree with part (a) of this statement but agree with part (b). [55]. Obviously, my opinion about Putin and FSB was not favorable. Ellol probably did not like this, judging from his uncivil comment to other users who criticized Putin [56].
Then he reacts by posting the following message using Russian criminal slang and claiming that he only wants to understand my "level of modern colloquial Russian language". After a couple of meaningless phrases, he wrote the following continuous text:
"Everything can be done for money. "I do not like Putin". Coming to an agreement at the court of thieves is better than to be killed by Stiletto. [Your] creativity is shit. Author is fu...er. One must be punished for making too much noise. Fate of Yukos has been decided [by Putin] based on the laws of criminal world, not state laws. [You] pissed someone off by promoting nonsense"
Translation comments. (Russian: ""Бабки рулят", "Путин меня не вставляет", "Пацанские распальцовки на стрелках -- всё-таки цивилизованнее, чем заточка в бок", "КГ/АМ", "Западло не отвечать за базар", "Дело ЮКОСа разрулили по понятиям, а не по закону", "Задолбал толкать фуфло"). )[57] The literal meaning of abbreviation "КГ/АМ" ([Your] creativity is shit. Author is fu...er.) can be found in article about Russian obscene language in Russian Wikipedia [58]. This is correct translation, although alternative translations are always possible from the slang.Biophys 21:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Evidence presented by {your user name}
[edit] {Write your assertion here}
Place argument and diffs which support your assertion; for example, your first assertion might be "So-and-so engages in edit warring", which should be the title of this section. Here you would show specific edits to specific articles which show So-and-so engaging in edit warring.
[edit] {Write your assertion here}
Place argument and diffs which support the second assertion; for example, your second assertion might be "So-and-so makes personal attacks", which should be the title of this section. Here you would show specific edits where So-and-so made personal attacks.
[edit] Evidence presented by {your user name}
before using the last evidence template, please make a copy for the next person
[edit] {Write your assertion here}
Place argument and diffs which support your assertion; for example, your first assertion might be "So-and-so engages in edit warring", which should be the title of this section. Here you would show specific edits to specific articles which show So-and-so engaging in edit warring.
[edit] {Write your assertion here}
Place argument and diffs which support the second assertion; for example, your second assertion might be "So-and-so makes personal attacks", which should be the title of this section. Here you would show specific edits where So-and-so made personal attacks.
