User talk:Hunnjazal

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


Hi Hunnjazal, I had written privately to Bill (and wanted to write to you too but your email preferences are not enabled) that I won't be editing any further. However, I'm forced to leave this message mainly to point out to you that you have permanently blocked my IP too, which I think is a bit unfair as it's a dynamic IP and several users use it. The only casualty in such a case will be It is still upto you to decide on whether to review your decision and I leave it at that. I have always had immense respect for you and continue to do so even though I feel this ban has been rather hasty and certainly quite insulting. But, it's okay. You've done so much of service to that one cleanup editor can certainly be sacrificed. Now, that I am writing to you, I will like to point out a few facts and lies that have come up in past few days.

  1. Even the current draft of the policy says that sockpuppetry investigations as well as actions should be taken only in case of disruptions/vandalism. With due respect, please have a look at my small number of contributions from both the accounts and bring a single instance of vandalism committed by me. And notice that indulging in disruption/vandalism/vote-stacking is in the very definition of sockpuppetry none of which was committed by me. The new account was opened for some personal reasons which I need not go into here.
  2. The fact is that I have not been banned ever, even for an hour, on any WMF project before you bestowed this honour upon me.
  3. You said I created sockpuppet accounts even though I am an admin. This is again not a fact as I am not an admin anywhere and never was. I still do have reviewer rights with User:Lovysinghal account but I have not made use of it for almost an year now.
  4. Hemant alleged that I tried to stir ethnic issues with my new account. Someone should show me a single instance for that or you as an admin who is finally taking actions, should censure him. Atleast I, for one, feel so.
  5. Nowhere have I violated the spirit of the Wiki movement and my conscience is absolutely clear about this part - ban or no ban! I've only realized all over again that a pack of 100 stray dogs can even chase a loner lion Face-smile.svg The fact remains that these people were trying to take advantage of less activity and desysop Bill. I felt that someone needs to speak up and paid the price for that (and a very heavy one).
  6. We've worked together albeit briefly in the past. I hope you did sense some faith within myself towards Wiki objectives.
  7. Even after all this, Anunad gets away with 3 months, Jagdish Vyom who created a page on himself and is the textbook example for sockpuppetry roams free, and so does Krantmlverma. I only get ridicule to which I cannot reply

Cheers and ciao, SeanZCampbell (talk) 09:43, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Friendly advice[edit]

Hi again Hunnjazal,

You might wonder what am I doing here. But noticing the current trend on, I had to return to warn you (in the most friendly way possible). Perhaps we can blame it on you being new in admin-related work, but your recent actions are a cause of concern to me. If you have noticed my edits and views on, I'm dead against User:Krantmlverma, Anunad, Awadesh.Pandey and Dr. Jagdish Vyom and would of course have liked them to be blocked. But, the present checkuser results only end up showing the weakness of CU system. That Krant M. L. Verma and Awadesh Pandey are two separate individuals with two separate accounts (but too close to each other) has been verified by a former Wikimedia India official User:Shijualex. You can contact him if my word means nothing to you. Of course, it is still possible that these two conspire together and both of them should be rightly blocked (as they have been on other respectable wikis) but that should not be on the basis of a wrong CU result.
Similarly, Jagdish Vyom and Avnish Singh Chauhan are two separate individuals, both related to Hindi. Just do a simple Google search. But again, it is possible that they collude. While Jagdish Vyom should rightly be banned for his other acts like creating and protecting a page on himself, and Avnish Singh is no good IMO, I don't think he deserves this ban.
While at it, I should also put on record that I do not feel the concerned copyright violation by Anunad was a copyvio at all. In my humble view, Wikimedia ought to have fight it back. The complainant had simply put together a list of scientific names and their Hindi common names. It is common knowledge and certainly doesn't fall above the threshold of originality IMO. But then again, Anunad rightly deserves a block for other reasons.
Anyways, I just wanted to caution you that hasty admin actions can lead to being severely penalized. I myself could have filed an RfC but I respect you too much to do that. Take care, SeanZCampbell (talk) 08:32, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Possible meatpuppetry[edit]

Hi Hunnjazal, I don't think it's sockpuppetry any more. I have a strong feeling that it's a meatpuppetry. It seems unlikely that a new (or an inactive) user would randomly arrive at the discussion and !vote exactly in a same manner. Three random, unrelated people all have the same behaviour is beyond the realm of possibility. But I see no reason for Mala Chaubey being a sock; she has been canvassed to the discussion by Anunad. Even so there might be some sockpuppetry going on as well, the main concern is meatpuppetry now. Most recently a user (Praveentrivedi009; his blog) !voted, and, not so surprisingly, he was inactive for seven months.--Bill william compton (talk) 03:18, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Superprotect status[edit]

Dear Hunnjazal, since you are an administrator on a wiki from which no user participated in this discussion, I'd like to make sure you are aware of some recent events which may alter what the Wikimedia Foundation lets you do on your wiki: Superprotect.

Peteforsyth 09:21, 12 September 2014 (UTC)