User talk:PhilKnight

Welcome to Meta!

Hello PhilKnight, and welcome to the Wikimedia Meta-Wiki! This website is for coordinating and discussing all Wikimedia projects. You may find it useful to read our policy page. If you are interested in doing translations, visit Meta:Babylon. You can also leave a note on Meta:Babel or Meta:Metapub (please read the instructions at the top of the page before posting there). If you would like, feel free to ask me questions on my talk page. Happy editing!

So what do we do now?

Hi Phil, you are an arbitrator on English wiki. You are probably aware that I wrote Requests for comment/Gwen Gale, in which I stated that:

• Gwen Gale is misusing her administrative tools,
• Gwen Gale harasses editors with unwarranted blocks, and unwarranted removing of talk page access,
• Gwen Gale posts blocks while involved,
• Gwen Gale responds to canvassing.
• Gwen Gale is dishonest and untruthful.
• Gwen Gale unable to assume good faith.

Phil, I believe the point is reached when keeping silence is no longer an option.I accused a respected administrator in being a bully, in being dishonest, in blocking editors when involved and so on. I believe I either should be proven wrong and be blocked on meta, or some actions should be done on my request because although I called it "request for comments" it is actually more like request for arbitration.

I was blocked many times. I consider at least 80% of my blocks to be unfair. For example Sandstein blocked me for violation of my topic ban on I/P conflict for an edit I made in Rothschild Family. There is no single word in that article about Palestinians, Arabs, war and so on. How did I violate my ban by editing this article? Most others blocks aren't any more valid.

Have I ever complained about any of these blocks. No, never! For example please see my reaction on yet another unfair block that was actually lifted with an apology, and here's one more, when I was blocked by a very much involved admin. Once you blocked me yourself. I was not happy about this block, but have I ever complained? No.

So why I do complain now? I do because Gwen Gale took blocking to a whole new level, which is bullying.

I assure you I do not hold grudges against Gwen Gale. I am not after her blood. The only thing I want is preventing her from striking an innocent editor again. If she only acknowledged there are problems with her using her tools, and promised to fix these...but so far she said nothing.

How many admins you know who imposed blocks for fixing "a punctuation typo"? How many admins you know who blocked an editor for telling Jimbo how he (the editor) made $1,000 donation to Wikipedia?

Phil, may I please ask you to take a look at this section, in which I presented 4 instances of Gwen Gale making bad blocks while involved. The differences were taken from four consecutive years:2008,2009,2010 and 2011 (with the last one being only about 2 months ago) Do we have to wait until 2012 will be added there. You know that an admin could be desysoped for making a single unblock like happened to User:Trusilver. The question is how many bad blocks an admin should impose that he/she would get desysoped?

I probably will leave a similar message on some others arbitrators talk pages.

Thanks.--Mbz1 02:38, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Hello again.

You could ignore me, but you could not and should not ignore the evidences I presented. If somebody who were blocked unfairly by gwen did what I am doing now, me and many other good faith contributors will still be editing wikipedia.

While some of Gwen's blocks are just bad blocks,the others are simply unbelievable! For example, please take a look at this block: On 26 April 2009 Gwen Gale blocked user Funguy06 with the edit summary "(Vandalism-only account: no meaningfully encyclopedic edits)". The user who started contributing to wikipedia in 2006 was blocked over this 2009 edit for "vandalism only". Really? But please see the article. Funguy06 was right! He vandalized nothing. The edit was a good faith, encyclopedic edit. This block is not just a bad block. This block is unbelievable. The user is gone. He did not even bother to write an unblock request. Now, if ArbCom does nothing to stop a dishonest bully, arbcom is becoming her co-conspirator in destroying wikipedia. Regards.--Mbz1 23:19, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Is the next victim of Gwen Gale's bullying is going to harm himself?

Hi Phil, I've just noticed this exchange at Alison's talk page, and then I noticed this post by WMF and now please take a look here. As you could see this user (I believe he is very young) wrote an unblock request in which he directly mentioned (complained) about Gwen Gale, and she was the one who declined his unblock! Doesn't she understand that this user feels hounded by her? I documented this misuse of tools yesterday in my RFC before later developments . Of course nobody payed any attention. Is next Gwen's victim is going to harm himself under indifferent watch of arbcom and WMF? Could you sleep well with a protected bully at the run while my well documented findings simply getting ignored? I am not saying his unblock request should have been accepted. I am saying Gwen Gale as a heavily involved admin should not have been the one to decline it, and she did it at the time I have been documenting her other bullying. I know wikipedia is not a therapy, but it should not be a site that allows supports bullying either!I am not against Gwen Gale. I am for victims of bullying, and I am proud of what I am doing!--Mbz1 06:53, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Note!

Hi, Phil just that either use the JavaScript way to vote in the steward elections or use the template:

# {{Se-vote|2012|Your username|checked=|cb=}} <optional comments>. ~~~~ 

And I see you have not done either. I have fixed it for now.--Ankit Maity (talk) 11:43, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. PhilKnight (talk) 16:49, 21 February 2012 (UTC)