Odin5000

Macedonia debate

Please stop edit-warring over the Macedonia discussion pages. The number and nature of the proposals that are currently up for comment were determined by a lot of prior discussion and have now been finalised by a preliminary vote and authoritative decision of the referees. These decisions are informed by our existing Wikipedia-internal policies. Introducing "former Yugoslav..." in all those places is just not compatible with the policies and has not a snowball's chances in hell of succeeding. I can understand that this is politically unsatisfactory to you and other Greeks, but that's just as it is. Disrupting the process will not change anything. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:51, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Please stop trying to dictate your political views to others. The fact that Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia is missing as a choice clearly shows that Wikipedia has taken sides on a political issues, is acting in an anti-Greek and racist manner insulting to Greeks and is in violation of its own guidelines.--Odin5000 (talk) 15:55, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

As a referee on these pages, I am advising you to cease this activity - the proposals on the page are the result of an Arbcom decision and two weeks of discussion. Feel free to endorse any of the existing proposals, but do not edit war. Fritzpoll (talk) 15:57, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

The proposals are the result of no such thing, otherwise the alternative of "Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" would have been included. It is clear that the opinions of Greece, Greeks and academics have been deliberately erased from discussion and voting and you have proven this yourself by example.--Odin5000 (talk) 16:02, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Please cease this behaviour. You are being grossly disruptive and I expect that you will be blocked if you continue. -- ChrisO (talk) 15:58, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Please stop erasing peoples votes. See above.--Odin5000 (talk) 16:02, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

You're not simply endorsing proposals. You're adding new proposals. We have already discussed which proposals would be put forward for discussion, and new proposals - or old proposals that have been eliminated - should not be added at this stage. In short, you're too late to add anything new. Just endorse one of the proposals that's already there (or not, of course). -- ChrisO (talk) 16:04, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Please stop erasing peoples votes. It is clear that the proposals were not the result of a reasoned debate or a democratic vote with people like you erasing peoples comments and votes that go against your own political views. Why isn't there a Secret Ballot, which would prevent peoples votes from being erased by people like yourself? It is clear that these proposals are a complete and utter farce and they will never solve the problem at all unless people who support Greece are allowed to vote and debate fairly.--Odin5000 (talk) 16:10, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Your comment is too long. Please shorten it. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 16:08, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

My comment is not too long. You are taking sides. See above.--Odin5000 (talk) 16:10, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

If you don't shorten it, I will. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 16:16, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

If you attempt to tamper with my vote including my comments then I will report you for abuse.--Odin5000 (talk) 16:19, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Actually, on second thought, you are obviously an SPA whose only purpose is to try to shift the appearance of consensus, so I am removing your votes. If you wish to comment constructively, you may do so on the talk pages. However, if you post rants similar to your "endorsements", I will ban you from the discussion pages. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 16:26, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Notice of ban

You are now officially banned from all pages, including talk pages, relating to the Macedonia dispute. If you violate this ban once, I will block your account indefinitely. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 16:48, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

You are clearly trying to rig the results of votes by preventing people from voting and expressing an opinion you do not support and you should be banned from Wikipedia indefinitely. --Odin5000 (talk) 16:53, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Just out of curiosity: Could you please provide a link to the decision to ban? Many thanks, — Aitias // discussion 16:51, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Centralized_discussion/Macedonia&diff=prev&oldid=296617684 J.delanoy^gabs_adds 16:55, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Thanks for the quick reply. :) Best wishes, — Aitias // discussion 16:58, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

For people reading this page, these are my votes and comments which were erased by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:J.delanoy in his attempt to vote rig. He should be banned from Wikipedia indefinitely.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Centralized_discussion/Macedonia/Greece-related

Vote D

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Centralized_discussion/Macedonia/international_organizations

Vote C

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Centralized_discussion/Macedonia/other_articles

Vote E

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Centralized_discussion/Macedonia/other_page_titles

Vote C with reservations

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Centralized_discussion/Macedonia/main_articles

Vote D with reservations

My Comments on all the above which were erased are as follows:

"All other proposals seek to steal the identity of Greek Macedonia and Macedonian history and are racist, politically motivated, violate Wikipedia's rules on accuracy and neutrality and is insulting to Greeks and academics who know that the only Macedonia is the province of Greece and the FYROM is the result of Titos bid to lay claim to Greek territory by renaming the Yugoslav province of Vardarska Banovinia with the name of the Greek province to which it has no historical or geographic connection to whatsoever. At no time in history did the Slavs of Vardarska Banovinia ever refer to themselves as Macedonians or the region in which they lived as Macedonians. Only the Greeks used the terms Macedonia and Macedonians to refer to themseselves and the land they inhabited in northern Greece and the term was never used to refer to a wider fixed geographic region. The term Macedonia only pertained to Greece and Greeks. The only acceptable way to refer to the entity know as the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia is the name by which it entered the United Nations, FYROM. This is the name by which it is recognised by all the international organisation it is a member over and the only name which stands to reason."--Odin5000 (talk) 17:03, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

About one post away from a block here...

You've been told by multiple editors that what you are doing is disruptive. If you don't take this to heart, but instead keep arguing about how the use of one term or the other is insulting, I will block you. I've never interacted with you before, and I don't think I've ever edited a Macedonian article either, so I'm not involved in any way. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:12, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Ban_J.delanoy_for_Vote_Rigging - final warning

Please note that this has been archived. Further posts will result in a block. — Aitias // discussion 18:18, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Blocked and topic banned

Blocked 72 hours, see this which was posted after the final warning by Sarek. You are also banned from anything related to the Macedonia dispute, including talk pages, central discussions, ANI threads, anything at all, indefinitely. — Rlevse • Talk • 18:21, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

The only way you think you can win an argument is by banning people with a different opinion from yourselves in order to stop them from voting or editing articles to set the facts right from you pro-Fyromian biased views. You shouldn't even be allowed to either edit, vote or discuss the subjects you moderate you cowards.--Odin5000 (talk) 21:23, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

There are plenty of Greeks who are able to contribute in a constructive, collaborative, civil, and collegial manner to the discussions regarding FYROM naming. You are proving unable to do so.

Wikipedia is not imposing a predetermined decision on the naming. HOWEVER, if you fail to abide by our policy on civil and polite editing, our policy against making personal attacks, our policy against editing disruptively, then you fail to understand or willingly participate in Wikipedia in compliance with our community standards. If you fail to abide by community standards you are not welcome here. This is not because of your beliefs on FYROM naming - it's because of your behavior in arguing your position.

If this is your position going forwards, you do not belong here, because you are aggressively disrupting and disrespecting everyone else around you and their right to find consensus in a polite and constructive environment. If this is your position going forwards I would like to respectfully request that you simply walk away from Wikipedia, because you are not compatible with the community standards here.

If you continue to push the issue, you will be permanently blocked from editing. This type of behavior is not acceptable.

Please accept our community standards on behavior and stop pushing people's buttons. If you can't, then please walk away before I or someone else blocks you.

Thank you. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 22:17, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

You don't have any standards. That is why Wikipedia is now banned by all universities in citations. If you had standards, all ballots would be in secret, all users of Wikipedia including readers would have the right to vote, and so-called moderators would not be allowed to take part in votes, or debates or edit other peoples comments or votes, which is what you have all done in order to support the side of FYROM. You know nothing about Greeks, so don't patronise me. You don't even mention in you rationales for your so-called vote/discussion on Macedonia, that Macedonia is a province of Greeks, so why should FYROM be called by the same name as a Greek province in pages concerning Greece. --Odin5000 (talk) 22:30, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

You are indicating a fundamental misunderstanding of Wikipedia: we don't do voting. Universities (rightly in my view) ban us from citations because of the terms of out disclaimer that is linked on every single article. If you don't like the way this privately owned website is run, you are not forced to participate. All we are asking you to do is interact with the community in a civil consensus-building manner. Fritzpoll (talk) 23:45, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

To amplify what Fritzpoll said:

We are not a democracy. We work by talking topics out and finding a consensus. We don't vote, because it's too easy for one side to go around our internal community and line up external parties to vote and influence votes. That you are talking of this indicates that you don't understand Wikipedia well right now. Go look at WP:CONSENSUS and WP:PILLARS.

Your behavior here would have gotten you thrown out of a college debating society, or most bars. It would be unacceptable in an academic setting. It's not acceptable here.

Wikipedia isn't here to solve real world problems or to be a battleground to fight real-world disagreements in. You're trying to use it for that purpose - trying to use it to determine or influence the real-world debate regarding what the FYROM should properly be named. We really aren't here for that purpose. That you are trying to do this on Wikipedia is grossly inappropriate and insulting to Wikipedia and its community.

You have been politely asked to stop and given all the information we have to show you what our policies and community standards are. If you chose to ignore those, despite our best attempts to inform you and give you all opportunities to participate within those standards, then you have to go.

It's up to you. If you chose to participate in Wikipedia in an adult and respectful manner, then there's no further problem. If you continue with what you have been doing, your participation is over. It's a simple as that. If you really don't respect our community and our rules and social structures, you don't belong here. It's up to you. We have shown you the respect of continuing to discuss this with you in a polite manner and given you the information you need to continue to participate without problem, if you chose to. If you chose to spurn that advice and the opportunity, we can't help you, and you need to go.

If you see this as patronizing, then that's unfortunate. We're trying to both treat you with respect and assume good faith that you can be an adult about this an change your behavior, and defend Wikipedia from those who chose to try and destroy it. Even if you do not explicitly intend to do so, behaving abusively like you have been has a strong negative effect on the community, which is why those behaviors are banned. We cannot allow this type of behavior.

I hope that you appreciate that we're trying to be as clear as possible about what Wikipedia's standards, policies, and expectations are in this situation. If you do not agree with those, then that's fine, but you can't participate here.

The choice is up to you.

Thank you. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 00:14, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Then prove you are not here to carry out political censorship and prevent discussion by people with views different to yours by un-banning me --Odin5000 (talk) 02:20, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Macedonia

For what it's worth I think you were hard done by. The user who deleted your opinions was completely out if line provoked this situation. Forget Wikipedia. It's a sham. Sign up for Citizendium instead. In a couple of years it'll be #1. Don't waste your time here.

I don't think you should expect citizendium to be a much easier place to be a POV warrior·Maunus·ƛ· 19:33, 27 June 2009 (UTC)