User talk:Romihaitza
Де ла Википедия ын лимба молдовеняскэ
Pagina mea de discuţii se poate găsi la: My talk page can be found at: Romihaitza
Please do not send me here any messeges. Vă rog să nu îmi trimiteţi aici mesaje. Cînd doriţi să îmi trimiteţi mesaje, vă rog folosiţi pagina indicată.
Salut Mihaitza. Wikipedia asta trebuie sa dispara. Nu exista nici un motiv sa existe in forma actuala. Numai bine. Nodu a facut destul rau. Fratele lui Bonaparte, il cunosti? 15:20, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Desysop
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Yann#Permissions_2 http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Node_ue#Sysop_on_mo:
His explanation to me revealed only some very obvious facts. In my experience, a user should only be immediately desysopped if they were given the position without a vote, which isn't the case here (see Wikipedia:Candidaţi).
Also, it seems that rather than investigating the accusation, he just desysopped me with no further thought. In fact, the user I blocked was moving pages so fast to new titles and would not pause to discuss his actions, by the dozen, and replacing their contents with direct copy from ro.wp which displayed syntax errors (since "imagine" must be written "image" instead, or it won't display an image), and removed the ROmanian WP interwiki.
Also, I blocked this user for the relatively short period of 3 days -- I have always been careful to not block any logged-in user indefinitely because when I did in the past, Ronline requested that I shorten it, and also because I don't want to give an appearance of impropriety or to look like I'm quashing opposing viewpoints, which is not my intention.
--Node ue 22:10, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Vot
Hi Mihai,
Pavel added a restriction to the vote that a user have 25 contribs on mo.wiki or ro.wiki.
As I noted elsewhere, I think the fact that it includes users from ro.wiki even though the vote is on mo.wiki, but not users from any other Wikis, would make any results invalid for a potentially binding decision.
Also, one of the restrictions by Pavel is that one must have an "adequate" command of the language. He does not define it, but makes it clear that he is to be the judge of that. That way, he can exclude anybody who disagrees with him by saying they don't have an adequate claim of the language, even if it's the only language they know! This is downright discrimination, something which Wikipedia disagrees with.
--Node
[edit] Bonaparte
Hi Mihai,
In case you hadn't found out already, it was proven with the CheckUser function that Bonaparte had been using sockpuppets to vote on RfAs and help him in revert wars on the English Wikipedia.
Also, from the evidence available, apparently it seemed that he often used proxies. Therefore, I suggest that we make sure to verify any vote extremely carefully -- they should be a very, very well-established user of some Wikipedia, or we should be able to verify in some other definitive way.
Otherwise, I think it's quite likely that Bonaparte will try to influence affairs here with sockpuppets using proxies as well... and he may well be doing so already. --Node ue 20:57, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
- Chiar asa? Papa-lapte. Pot sa ma verifice. Sunt alb ca zapada. :) Fratele lui Bonaparte, il cunosti? 21:15, 13 January 2006 (UTC)