This user is an administrator, oversighter and checkuser.
This user has a bot (inactive)
Email this user.

User talk:Billinghurst

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search



Je suis Charlie
"Da mihi basium"
User language
en-N This user has a native understanding of English.
fr-1 Cet utilisateur dispose de connaissances de base en français.
Users by language
To leave me a message, click this link


Badges[edit]

mwl:Modelo:Buono anterwiki can be deleted the same way Link FA was deleted in the same Wikipedia. -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:11, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Time2wait.svg will let the community review for some days  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:32, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #155[edit]

Page move[edit]

Hey, I see you've been editing here recently, so I'm hoping to catch you soon with this request. I've moved the previous (3-year-old) contents of Article counts revisited, which I am almost entirely responsible for (and its talk page), into my userspace to make way for more relevant, current, and voluminous information on the same topic, which I would like to move from my userspace to the same title as I used before. As a normal user, I can't finish this "swap". So could you please move User:Dcljr/Article count changes (with its associated talk page) to Article counts revisited for me (over the redirect now there)? Thanks in advance... - dcljr (talk) 07:28, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done  — billinghurst sDrewth 08:37, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Oops… no, you accidentally just undid my original page move. I wanted "User:Dcljr/Article count changes" moved to "Article counts revisited". So now I need you to:
(Both with their accompanying talk pages.) Sorry about the confusing mix of titles. - dcljr (talk) 17:02, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done Noting that there was a subpage that was not moved User:Dcljr/Article count changes/All affected wikis. @Dcljr: let me know if that needs moving. I was operating off the mobile site yesterday and that just was/is butt ugly for what was needed with the redirects, etc. (mental note: do not use mobile site for anything but plain vanilla)  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:01, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, I still have subpages that need moving, but I can do that myself because it won't conflict with any existing titles. Thanks for doing this for me. - dcljr (talk) 02:41, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Once again a help request[edit]

Hi,

After your suggession on this talk page at mr wikipedia we got import page facility activated, I imported commons:Template:Self and commons:Module:Fallback along with subtemplates there of; but :

  • First still mr:Template:Self shows some errors, at first glance I do not understand the reason for error. Please do have a look at mr:w:Template:Self and guide me how do we sort out the errors.
  • Secondly from plain reading of mr:Module:Fallback it seems we need to mention default language for mr wikipedia some where, but I could not understand exactly where and how ?
  • Third where one is supposed to look for base and/or root pages of templates and modules.

Waiting for your kind help,

with warm regards

Mahitgar (He who knows ,wants to know and and loves to keep others informed) (talk) 07:08, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Commons's fallback appears to need c:Module:Fallbacklist though it is only the resultant code that you actually need. However, the bulk of those errors seem to be in the documentation template, not the actual template, which suggests just ditch the doc layer, and copy what you need to document in your native language. The template seems to work fine mr:चित्र:Wireless_mouse_img.jpg  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:41, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #156[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #157[edit]

Am blocked at Urdu Wikipedia, please unblock me[edit]

Hello Billinghurst, Today I tried to add articles in Urdu wikipedia but they blocked me without explaining any reason. There is a user known as USMANKHAN who repeatedly reverted my edits and then another user Obaid Raza blocked me from editing articles. He also deleted my added articles without any discussion or any pre-warnings. Kindly help me get unblocked and to be able to add articles. Here you can see that he has blocked me without explaining anything. --Khangul (talk) 18:24, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Mr billinghurst it has been the second time that I am being blocked by the admins of urdu wikipedia without any explaination. I am trying to translate articles and publish the articles in Urdu wikipedia but they dont let me do that. Kindly help me with this issue.--Khangul (talk) 22:24, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
@Khangul: I have left a message on your urWP user talk page asking for the blocking administrator to address this issue.  — billinghurst sDrewth 07:35, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi billinghurst, thanks for asking the actual reason behind blocking. In fact user:Khangul does not know Urdu language, but he tried to write articles in urdu using pushto alphabets and wordings. some admins noticed this vandalism and asked the user to stop creating articles, but the subjected user did not notice this message. Eventually I blocked him explaining reasons in urdu language, and that's why user:usmankhan reverted his edits and user:Obaid Raza blocked him for 2 hours before me. Hope you understand our problems and issues, thanks. Muhammad Shuaib (talk) 11:39, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
@Khangul, محمد شعیب: I just want to see an end to the squabbling, and would like to see a plan to how to cooperatively edit. I know that having to talk to users takes time, and can sometimes can be painful and infuriating, but that is truly one of the responsibilities of an admin. I also see nothing on the user's talk page about stopping, and would hope that urWP community could look to ensure that you do communicate on user talk pages AND that they do not block user talk page access unless totally necessary. Blocks are the lazy and dismissive way to handle things, and should be used as a last resort, where people can be editing in good faith.

I looking forward to seeing who can be more mature in their approach.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:31, 10 May 2015 (UTC)


@Billinghurst, محمد شعیب: Mr. Muhammad Shuaib the information you have posted here about me is totally wrong. I can speak, read and write Urdu. Most of the Afghanis can speak and read and write Urdu langauge since they have lived many years in Pakistan as refugees. Vandalism is not defined as adding articles in wikis. It is a process of spreading misinformation or deleting content of articles. I to add to the information regarding Afghan writers, but every article I have added was deleted for unknown reason. They also blocked the access to my talk page or their talk page so that I could discuss and refer to the problem locally. I had to come here to meta and write here to billinghurst. Mr. Shuaib you claim that i didnt notice the message, kindly put a link of the message that you have posted to me before imposing a ban on me. If you dont show the proof then it means that its just a lie. Mr Usman khan reverted every message and its content because he is doing rivalry without any reason. He has already come up with false claims about me to billinghurst and other stewards and they removed mine and other admins rights from Pashto wiki. Even in Pashto wiki whenever I write something he show up for no reason and try to oppose any suggestion i give him.--Khangul (talk) 17:33, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: I am still blocked in urWiki. Please unblock me--Khangul (talk) 18:26, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
@Khangul: Local administrators act on urWP, it is not for me to individually override their actions. Your place for conversation is w:ur:User talk:Khangul. As I understand it, you were blocked for three days, and by my calculation that block will now have expired, and you should be able to edit.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:47, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Make laos wikipedia[edit]

I think current laos wikipedia is very botched and be abundant with ridiculous article and troll users, i want you appoint me as bureaucrats of laos wikipedia for manager it, i'll be creating new wikipedia, thank you--Laomonarchrestore (talk) 22:27, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

If there is no local policy about the appointment of admins for loWP, then please follow the process expressed at SRP. I doubt that we would appoint bureaucrats for loWP at this point of time.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:25, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Not have local policy about the appointment of admins in Laos wikipedia--Laomonarchrestore (talk) 16:50, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
I didn't think so, so please follow the processes for the small wikis.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:09, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Why am i blocked?[edit]

Can you tell me why my ip is blocked on all wikis? I never wrote anything on this page. But on the german Site about the Term "apriori" is a mistake!

greetz —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 178.162.203.234 (talk) 2015-05-12 20:19:48

I cannot tell you the exact reason for the original range block, as I didn't make it. It is a soft block on the /17, so you should be able to edit if you are logged into a wikimedia account. If you don't have an account, you can create one at this link.  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:34, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

a persistent old spam issue[edit]

Hi,

Please refer Wikidata:Wikidata:Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive/2015/03 discussion and Vandalism_reports/Archive_7#Javad_Ramezani an old global spamming issue seems to be still around as late as today en wikipedians are discussing the same issue at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Iran man once more, en wikipedians seem not aware of the fact that this is a global issue discussed earlier at wikidata and meta.

I was under impression that soon you might put a global filter from meta for this issue. If global filter is not possible do we go ahead with local filters for this spam issue (I am talking about mr-wikis).

Mahitgar (He who knows ,wants to know and and loves to keep others informed) (talk) 07:24, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

There is a global filter for this gentleman in place, and it does cover mrWP. enWP is not covered by global filters, that is small/medium/opt-in wikis.  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:46, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Where do I post link?[edit]

Hi Billinghurst,

You left me a ping recently, telling me to make an edit on my user page that is to be merged, and then to leave a link to the edit on the stewardship page. However, the section I posted about getting my name back is missing, so I'm not sure where to post the diff. Can you please clarify? (Sorry, I'm not to computer savvy.) Zaereth (talk) 05:29, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Request for suggessions[edit]

Hi,

On meta, I have created a new page for cross wiki collaboration, Edit filters benefiting to various local Wikiprojects. Your suggessions about article or in the article, are most welcome wherever whenever possible to your goodselves.

Frankly I need support in correction of my english used in the article. Since one of the main complaits about my righting is about my broken english :)


Thanks and warm regards.

Mahitgar (He who knows ,wants to know and and loves to keep others informed) (talk) 13:29, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #158[edit]

Names of Wikimedia Languages[edit]

Dear Billinghurst,

we are initiating a long needed action - we would like to translate names of all Wikimedia languages to all Wikimedia languages in the next two months. We have noticed that you are active on Abkhaz Wikipedia and that is the reason why we are taking liberty to contact you.

We hope that you would be interesting to help us in our endeavor - To make this action easier we have already prepared the list of all Wikimedia languages, and for each language we have already prepared the page with existing and missing translations. So when you go to the page for your language you would have two tasks - to check whether existing translations are OK and to fill in the missing one. The more detailed instruction are on the language page.

What are the benefits of this work?

  • We believe it is about time to have all Wikimedia languages translated to all Wikimedia languages :)
  • Translated languages will be parsed into Wiktionary and the resulting number of Wiktionary entries will be significant for each language. That could significantly increase the number of entries for less developed Wiktionaries, and improve the quality of entries in general. We are aware that there is no Wiktionary in your language, (yet ;)) but your contribution would influence other Wiktionaries.
  • Wikidata - this would be great contribution to Wikidata.
  • All other projects could benefit from this list (Wiki Travel :)), as we believe that certain amount of terms has to be properly translated to all languages.

We are gathered around the project Wiktionary Meets Matica Srpska and we hope that you would be interesting in working with us! If you have any questions you can ask them on the Names of Wikimedia languages discussion page or via personal emails.

Important notice: The data are licensed under CC0, as they should be incorporated into Wikidata at the end of the process.

If you don’t want to receive future announcement about the project, please leave a note on discussion page.

Thank you and looking forward to hear from you!

Interglider.org team

Godzzzilica (talk) 13:44, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Rename Please my Username[edit]

Hello I have been blocked , because my name is advertising, Pleaserename my username Thank you , i will be wait news from you

Best Regards —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Valters.Germanis.Evelatus (talk)

Please place your request at Special:GlobalRenameRequest and someone will undertake it.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:53, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

No need to rename my user name![edit]

Thanks for your message that there is no need dot rename my unser-name 'Reidy'. So I leave it like it is.

Kind regards —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Reidy (talk)

Face-smile.svg  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:40, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Global locking[edit]

Hi billinghurst, how much activity is required to be suitable for a global lock? The user [of the edit I reverted, which you thanked me] got blocked on en wiki. Tropicalkitty (talk) 09:20, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Communities will manage it, cluelessness isn't a reason for locking. We will let the communities sort him out.  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:28, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Okay thank you for that info. I'll keep that in mind so I don't end up asking that question again. Tropicalkitty (talk) 09:31, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Compte bloqué[edit]

Cher correspondant,

J'ai lu que vous aviez bloqué mon compte parce que vous avez suspecté que mes interventions ressemblaient à celles d'une intervention "robotisée". Il n'en est rien, mon IP change régulièrement en effet car je me connecte par le système IP Vanish je pense que vous connaissez. Je vous remercie de bien vouloir me répondre ou de faire en sorte que je ne sois plus bloqué.

Salutations, Frédéric. Fredericknetwork (talk) 15:22, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

@Fredericknetwork: I have softened the block. You should now be able to edit when you are logged into your wikimedia account.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:28, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Ҷовид Рамазонӣ[edit]

Good evening. Why do you delete pages tg:Ҷовид Рамазонӣ and left erroneous in terms of grammar Tajik language name tg:Ҷавод Рамазон? What kind of conflict you write? thank you.--AryanSogd 16:06, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

@AryanSogd: This one of a few crosswiki spammers who repeatedly create articles about themselves through many sock puppets or IP addresses. Wherever they creates their articles, we delete them and protect the page.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:14, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Got it, sorry to trouble you. Thank you.--AryanSogd 12:15, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
@AryanSogd: Very happy for you to come here and ask for an explanation. All replies provide information and understanding (hopefully).  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:55, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #159[edit]

emoji filter[edit]

It looks like the emoji filter is pretty much 100% vandalism at this point. Do you think it would make sense to switch it to actually prevent the edits (instead of just warning and logging)? Kaldari (talk) 18:44, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

It isn't 100% vandalism, there has been appropriate use on some wikis, especially Wikidata. Communities have been doing a great job following up. Now if we could identify the addition of emojis from mobile apps, that might be a great fork to follow for blocking, though again WD would be an interest to monitor first.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:30, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Welcome message from Wikivoyage[edit]

Hi, Billinghurst. I'm Ikan Kekek, an admin at Wikivoyage. You have a distinguished record of service to Wikimedia, but I still think you could benefit from the Wikivoyage welcome message, which includes links you may want to look at at your leisure. You'll find that some of these aren't relevant to you, but there are some that are.

Hello! Welcome to Wikivoyage.

To help get you started contributing, we've created a tips for new contributors page, full of helpful links about policies and guidelines and style, as well as some important information on copyleft and basic stuff like how to edit a page.

If you need help, check out Help, or post a message in the travellers' pub.

If you are a Wikipedian, or have previously used Wikipedia, then you may notice some differences in the style of our articles. These include:

  • "External links" → We do not use a separate external links section, but incorporate primary links only into the text itself.

If you have any questions, please post to my user talk page on Wikivoyage, as I don't check Meta too often.

Thanks for contributing! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:43, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

@Ikan Kekek: Please feel comfortable putting a welcome message on my pertinent user talk page at which Wikivoyage. The redirects were often set up early on in the days of the creation of the wikis, prior to their welcome messages.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:01, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
No need, now that I've put it here - the links all work. However, if you would like people to feel free to use your user talk page on Wikivoyage, you might want to clarify that on your WV user talk page. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:46, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Please help for a nation-wide issue. You may not , of course, but if you dont help, viki of a whole country will be opressed ever by scoundrels[edit]

PLEASE HELP US. Just examine the issue, I trust you will decide rightly. I am afraid, RFC may not be useful to explain the real situtation. Becuse, there is a probability that the people which mistread, will be judgers again, for the same issue. But if you dont make something, viki of a country of 70 million people, wil never be developed.

Pages in Turkish viki are considered as a space of power struggle and of political propaganda, by the members who must be responsible for protecting our wiki ideals.

The issue is general, which is valid for all Turkish members with some authorization, to erase, to edit or to ban. So, you should revise their personal situations as a whole. The authorized active members in Turkish viki are few in number, and they aim to maintain this situation, so, to stay as an elite ruling Turkish viki.

The charged users of Turkish viki, who gained eligibility over other users and content, systematically apply cencorship, opression and harrassment over the regular users and contributed contents from regular users. They systemically impede corrections and editing approaches, especially for protecting articles which they constructed for propaganda purposes. However, obstraction and cencorship are general rules, to protect their power-positions, to protect their biased policy and to conceal their unfaithfulness against wiki criterias. Also, they systematically hinder the opening of new pages. So, there is a serious barrier, against newcomers for collecting points and gaining access for eligibilities.

The opression is unbearable especially in case of the pages about the ciritical-Islamist philosophers and writers. However, in general, this negative attribute is against all Turkish academicians and university members. Turkish viki seems declared a war against Turkish universities and scientists.

The abuse of authority and abuse of delegation rights, among Turkish users-in-charge or gate-keepers, are hard to be explained. However, international stewarts and wiki bureaucrats can assess the situtation very clearly, if they examine two recent examples which I give below. Okurogluselo (talk) 18:00, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

First, the case about Prof.Dr Celalettin Vatandas. Vatandas is a sociologist and the writer of twelve books about the early-history of Islam, the historical problems of Muslim communities, post-colonial studies, and problems caused by modernity processes in eastern nations.Also, he has books about multi-culturalism and late-modernity problems in all nations of the world. All of the books are still in circulation and publication reports say, these are good sellers in their own category. His massive study about the world-cognition of Turkish youth ( The youth in Turkey) gives way to national-wide argumentations in Turkey. His books are in Turkish, but he has also articles in English. Moreover, he is the first council in very credible official foundation of Republic in Turkey, Ataturk Highest Institution of Culture,Language and History, called AYK in abbreviation. He is the vice-president of Gumushane University and the dean of the faculty of Communication Sciences there.

I wrote an article about him including all points above,(the ones proper for viki), gave bibliography and sources in proper format, even I added links of internet news from credible sites about his populer studies. But the members of abusement, our viki "elites", erased the page, with the code of M6. They said, the professor is not worth of being in wikipedia. I tried to tell the truth in discussion page, also I sent messages to all the active users in charge. But instead of concerning the article in a proper way, they voted for it quickly in their narrow community, and erased it without reading or considering my last corrections. Everything was happened in period less than 36 hours. Not five days. Now, they erased even my polite objections to defense the value of the article. This is basically, the clearing of the proofs about their guilty-crime against wiki criterias.

Second case is the Şafak Yayla. Yayal was a member of DHKP-C, an absolutely terrorist organization, which is in terror list of US, UK, EU and Turkey. Yayla was an "armed" activist, and the murderer of the public prosecuter who was first hostaged by Yayla, with armed thread. Criminal reports said that the primer cause killed the prosecuter were the bullets from the pistol of Yayla and his partner in the action.

Can you think that such an activist, who was a member of a terrorist organization, was a terrorist? If not, who can be called as terrorist on earth? Do you say Baghdadi was not terrorist but president of his self-declared state? But our Turkish elite members doesnt allow to call Yayla as terrorist. In fact, I didnt attempt to call him terrorist, bu only objected to call him, as "proleteriat revolutuanist" and "activist". In case of it, I edited the article with saying that, DHKP-C is an internationally and officially recognized terrorist organization and Yayla was the member of it, still without calling him directly as terrorist. Within my statements, I gave a link to DHKP-C vikipedia article, which declares the organization's official terrorist situation -an old article, wrote before these self-evident elites-. However, they erased my corrections. And clearly I explained the reasons and benefits of my attempt, both in community dashboard of the case and in explanations of my writings.

Still the article, nor erased neither corrected. They struggled to keep it in the way they made. They erased all the points I collected from my contributions. And they attacked, with the accusation of not abiding the wiki rules. However, clearly I abide the rules, but they dont. The ones who are expected to protect, abuses and violating wiki criterias, to gain power, and to use this power.

Please make a judgement, and save us from these people.

Please help for a nation-wide issue. You may not , of course, but if you dont help, viki of a whole country will be opressed ever by scoundrels[edit]

PLEASE HELP US. Just examine the issue, I trust you will decide rightly. I am afraid, RFC may not be useful to explain the real situtation. Becuse, there is a probability that the people which mistread, will be judgers again, for the same issue. But if you dont make something, viki of a country of 70 million people, wil never be developed.

Pages in Turkish viki are considered as a space of power struggle and of political propaganda, by the members who must be responsible for protecting our wiki ideals.

The issue is general, which is valid for all Turkish members with some authorization, to erase, to edit or to ban. So, you should revise their personal situations as a whole. The authorized active members in Turkish viki are few in number, and they aim to maintain this situation, so, to stay as an elite ruling Turkish viki.

The charged users of Turkish viki, who gained eligibility over other users and content, systematically apply cencorship, opression and harrassment over the regular users and contributed contents from regular users. They systemically impede corrections and editing approaches, especially for protecting articles which they constructed for propaganda purposes. However, obstraction and cencorship are general rules, to protect their power-positions, to protect their biased policy and to conceal their unfaithfulness against wiki criterias. Also, they systematically hinder the opening of new pages. So, there is a serious barrier, against newcomers for collecting points and gaining access for eligibilities.

The opression is unbearable especially in case of the pages about the ciritical-Islamist philosophers and writers. However, in general, this negative attribute is against all Turkish academicians and university members. Turkish viki seems declared a war against Turkish universities and scientists.

The abuse of authority and abuse of delegation rights, among Turkish users-in-charge or gate-keepers, are hard to be explained. However, international stewarts and wiki bureaucrats can assess the situtation very clearly, if they examine two recent examples which I give below.

First, the case about Prof.Dr Celalettin Vatandas. Vatandas is a sociologist and the writer of twelve books about the early-history of Islam, the historical problems of Muslim communities, post-colonial studies, and problems caused by modernity processes in eastern nations.Also, he has books about multi-culturalism and late-modernity problems in all nations of the world. All of the books are still in circulation and publication reports say, these are good sellers in their own category. His massive study about the world-cognition of Turkish youth ( The youth in Turkey) gives way to national-wide argumentations in Turkey. His books are in Turkish, but he has also articles in English. Moreover, he is the first council in very credible official foundation of Republic in Turkey, Ataturk Highest Institution of Culture,Language and History, called AYK in abbreviation. He is the vice-president of Gumushane University and the dean of the faculty of Communication Sciences there.

I wrote an article about him including all points above,(the ones proper for viki), gave bibliography and sources in proper format, even I added links of internet news from credible sites about his populer studies. But the members of abusement, our viki "elites", erased the page, with the code of M6. They said, the professor is not worth of being in wikipedia. I tried to tell the truth in discussion page, also I sent messages to all the active users in charge. But instead of concerning the article in a proper way, they voted for it quickly in their narrow community, and erased it without reading or considering my last corrections. Everything was happened in period less than 36 hours. Not five days. Now, they erased even my polite objections to defense the value of the article. This is basically, the clearing of the proofs about their guilty-crime against wiki criterias.

Second case is the Şafak Yayla. Yayal was a member of DHKP-C, an absolutely terrorist organization, which is in terror list of US, UK, EU and Turkey. Yayla was an "armed" activist, and the murderer of the public prosecuter who was first hostaged by Yayla, with armed thread. Criminal reports said that the primer cause killed the prosecuter were the bullets from the pistol of Yayla and his partner in the action.

Can you think that such an activist, who was a member of a terrorist organization, was a terrorist? If not, who can be called as terrorist on earth? Do you say Baghdadi was not terrorist but president of his self-declared state? But our Turkish elite members doesnt allow to call Yayla as terrorist. In fact, I didnt attempt to call him terrorist, bu only objected to call him, as "proleteriat revolutuanist" and "activist". In case of it, I edited the article with saying that, DHKP-C is an internationally and officially recognized terrorist organization and Yayla was the member of it, still without calling him directly as terrorist. Within my statements, I gave a link to DHKP-C vikipedia article, which declares the organization's official terrorist situation -an old article, wrote before these self-evident elites-. However, they erased my corrections. And clearly I explained the reasons and benefits of my attempt, both in community dashboard of the case and in explanations of my writings.

Still the article, nor erased neither corrected. They struggled to keep it in the way they made. They erased all the points I collected from my contributions. And they attacked, with the accusation of not abiding the wiki rules. However, clearly I abide the rules, but they dont. The ones who are expected to protect, abuses and violating wiki criterias, to gain power, and to use this power.

Please make a judgement, and save us from these people. Okurogluselo (talk) 18:04, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Please help us, You may not of course, but if you dont help, whole viki of a country will be forever opressed, by scoundrels[edit]

PLEASE HELP US. Just examine the issue, I trust you will decide rightly. I am afraid, RFC may not be useful to explain the real situtation. Becuse, there is a probability that the people which mistread, will be judgers again, for the same issue. But if you dont make something, viki of a country of 70 million people, wil never be developed.

Pages in Turkish viki are considered as a space of power struggle and of political propaganda, by the members who must be responsible for protecting our wiki ideals.

The issue is general, which is valid for all Turkish members with some authorization, to erase, to edit or to ban. So, you should revise their personal situations as a whole. The authorized active members in Turkish viki are few in number, and they aim to maintain this situation, so, to stay as an elite ruling Turkish viki.

The charged users of Turkish viki, who gained eligibility over other users and content, systematically apply cencorship, opression and harrassment over the regular users and contributed contents from regular users. They systemically impede corrections and editing approaches, especially for protecting articles which they constructed for propaganda purposes. However, obstraction and cencorship are general rules, to protect their power-positions, to protect their biased policy and to conceal their unfaithfulness against wiki criterias. Also, they systematically hinder the opening of new pages. So, there is a serious barrier, against newcomers for collecting points and gaining access for eligibilities.

The opression is unbearable especially in case of the pages about the ciritical-Islamist philosophers and writers. However, in general, this negative attribute is against all Turkish academicians and university members. Turkish viki seems declared a war against Turkish universities and scientists.

The abuse of authority and abuse of delegation rights, among Turkish users-in-charge or gate-keepers, are hard to be explained. However, international stewarts and wiki bureaucrats can assess the situtation very clearly, if they examine two recent examples which I give below.

First, the case about Prof.Dr Celalettin Vatandas. Vatandas is a sociologist and the writer of twelve books about the early-history of Islam, the historical problems of Muslim communities, post-colonial studies, and problems caused by modernity processes in eastern nations.Also, he has books about multi-culturalism and late-modernity problems in all nations of the world. All of the books are still in circulation and publication reports say, these are good sellers in their own category. His massive study about the world-cognition of Turkish youth ( The youth in Turkey) gives way to national-wide argumentations in Turkey. His books are in Turkish, but he has also articles in English. Moreover, he is the first council in very credible official foundation of Republic in Turkey, Ataturk Highest Institution of Culture,Language and History, called AYK in abbreviation. He is the vice-president of Gumushane University and the dean of the faculty of Communication Sciences there.

I wrote an article about him including all points above,(the ones proper for viki), gave bibliography and sources in proper format, even I added links of internet news from credible sites about his populer studies. But the members of abusement, our viki "elites", erased the page, with the code of M6. They said, the professor is not worth of being in wikipedia. I tried to tell the truth in discussion page, also I sent messages to all the active users in charge. But instead of concerning the article in a proper way, they voted for it quickly in their narrow community, and erased it without reading or considering my last corrections. Everything was happened in period less than 36 hours. Not five days. Now, they erased even my polite objections to defense the value of the article. This is basically, the clearing of the proofs about their guilty-crime against wiki criterias.

Second case is the Şafak Yayla. Yayal was a member of DHKP-C, an absolutely terrorist organization, which is in terror list of US, UK, EU and Turkey. Yayla was an "armed" activist, and the murderer of the public prosecuter who was first hostaged by Yayla, with armed thread. Criminal reports said that the primer cause killed the prosecuter were the bullets from the pistol of Yayla and his partner in the action.

Can you think that such an activist, who was a member of a terrorist organization, was a terrorist? If not, who can be called as terrorist on earth? Do you say Baghdadi was not terrorist but president of his self-declared state? But our Turkish elite members doesnt allow to call Yayla as terrorist. In fact, I didnt attempt to call him terrorist, bu only objected to call him, as "proleteriat revolutuanist" and "activist". In case of it, I edited the article with saying that, DHKP-C is an internationally and officially recognized terrorist organization and Yayla was the member of it, still without calling him directly as terrorist. Within my statements, I gave a link to DHKP-C vikipedia article, which declares the organization's official terrorist situation -an old article, wrote before these self-evident elites-. However, they erased my corrections. And clearly I explained the reasons and benefits of my attempt, both in community dashboard of the case and in explanations of my writings.

Still the article, nor erased neither corrected. They struggled to keep it in the way they made. They erased all the points I collected from my contributions. And they attacked, with the accusation of not abiding the wiki rules. However, clearly I abide the rules, but they dont. The ones who are expected to protect, abuses and violating wiki criterias, to gain power, and to use this power.

Please make a judgement, and save us from these people. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Okurogluselo (talk)


As a steward I have little or no authority to make any decisions about Turkish Wikipedia more than a general user. So making comment on my talk page is not that productive.

Turkish Wikipedia is a self-determining community. Ideally all feedback about Turkish Wikipedia would be requested to take place on that wiki, though there will be some circumstances where it needs to take place on meta. If on Meta, it should either be in the form of an RFC or though Wikimedia Forum, both avenues for general subject matters. If you are looking for larger scale discussion, then an RFC is most definitely preferred, and a pointer from the Forum to an RFC would be encouraged.  — billinghurst sDrewth 07:00, 29 May 2015 (UTC)