Rocalisi

I regard myself a fair self critic Arab.

Edit war

The activities by the three user (names: Nableezy, Soman, Malik_Shabazz), that are continuously engaged in the edits war on the page Pan Arabism.

Nableezy

Have you ever used a prior account on Wikipedia? nableezy - 04:21, 12 April 2010 (UTC) I haven't whay do you ask me that question? Rocalisi (talk) 04:23, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Makes the next step easier. Bye. nableezy - 04:24, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

What? Rocalisi (talk) 05:07, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Nableez's suspicious obsessed accusations of supposed sock puppets

To Nableezy! As soon as I came to wikipedia you were the first to contact me and not in a welcoming manner but to ask me weird question did I have another account, I asked you why do you ask, you said: "it makes the next step easier", what the heck that means. Or, for instance, I wasn't very much of a fan of edits by LeeSeem, but I am against censorship, if it's covered via a supposed legitimate claim or other. The very fact that you tried to lump me with other people is in itself raising suspicion that you are only blocking-others-goal driven, not out of fact based, sincerity. Maybe somone can check your records, how many people you have tried to blame this on? (Nableezy's removal of my message) More on Re: Nableezy's trick blaming of sock puppetry on pan-Arabism page

---

I quote here what a user by the name Yasmina (Miss-simworld) wrote on extremists Arabists' way of doing/dictating things

lol the same happens to me with the other Radical Pan-Arabists editors they often like to intimidate others to put them off editing and try to undermine sources and their context. one of them even abusively vandalised a page where stated that many Christians dont relate with Arabism saying they were racists and it was lies from a bigotted minority (yes they got away with writing that until I stepped in and deleted it from the page), then the same person had a nerve to threaten to get me blocked for my disruptive editing. like I said sadly wikipedia is crawling with those wanting to supress or distort information rather than write from an accuarate or impartial perspective looking at the other side rather than the black and white. When they dont get their way they are willing to go to great lengths to vandalize or stop you from editing one of them even tried to (falsely) accuse me and Lanternix of being socks to get us banned. Like I said this is sadly the actions of a brainwashed blinded bunch of followers of a dead & racist ideology.♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 17:58, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

[1] Rocalisi (talk) 04:42, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Soman

Hello. Concerning your contribution, Kamel Riahi, please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://beirut39.blogspot.com/2010/03/white-skin-black-mask-interview-with.html. As a copyright violation, Kamel Riahi appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Kamel Riahi has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message.

If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License (CC-BY-SA) then you should do one of the following:

• If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Kamel Riahi and send an email with the message to permissions-enwikimedia.org. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
• If a note on the original website states that it is licensed under the CC-BY-SA license, leave a note at Talk:Kamel Riahi with a link to where we can find that note.
• If you hold the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the CC-BY-SA and GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Kamel Riahi.

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright concerns very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Thank you. Soman (talk) 02:26, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

[2] Rocalisi (talk) 04:24, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Malik Shabazz

[3] Rocalisi (talk) 03:34, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Blocked

Elockid ^(Talk) 20:09, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Rocalisi (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I am blocked only for decrying racism by pan Arabism Needless to say that there was no base for blocking me, other than persistant nagging by (Palestinian) nableezy who only has a campaign to push his POV down throats of all.

I have no clue who these people are, he tried to lump me with, including more names I saw on his recent contributions, my bad. His "evidences" because I insisted to be right on talk of pan-Arabism is senseless, it was he, who was persistant from my coming here to wikipedia with his "welcoming" message of "did you have a prior account?" which only invited me even more into the issue of pan Arabism's bloody history and present. These two factors have led me to be more active on pan arabism, his posting on my user page with that strange question, and Sean.hoyland asking me to respond on the discussion of pan Arabism, and if it wasn't enough for his satisfaction, he asked me to respond more, so I did. How then, does my argument there constitute "proof" that I sock? or, am I not allowed to copy information by people that were blocked (apparantly) due to Nableezy's actions? His methods, as I told him are too transparent, to dominate his POV upon everybody else, to put on the defensive --by accusing of sock-- all those that might have a different opinion. giving him having his way to dominate his dictating way, is a disservice to wikipedia, to academic freedom, to wikipedia users, history and truth. maybe, just maybe there's some unbias side on wikipedia, funny, someone emailed me 2 days ago about the power of a lobby on wikipedia... regardless if I am unblocked or not, it does show the "objectivity" seen who are the people that were blocked from the talk page of pan-Arabism and who was not, it was only on one side, enough said. This "checked user" thing means little when the motivations prior to the action is clear and there's no control on how, who's checking what, upto what high ranked level smells the bias? For me it's enough that I am lumped with so many people by the one that has complained (nableezy), to see the falsehood. Not only in relations to pan-Arabism Nableezy tried to pull this trick on in just the last few weeks alone (check his contributions, I counted about 11 or 12), God knows how many in the last years, it turns the tables -therefore- on the "accuser" not on other people. (note, this is not an "attack" on nableezy but to show the real background/motivation of this block), I don't take intimidations by no one, I shall alway speak the truth, if I am blocked here I will still let people know here (somehow) the truth, I promise! it was 100% unjustified! )

Please include a decline or accept reason.

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

==

I am blocked for decrying racism by pan Arabism

Needless to say that there was no base for blocking me, other than persistant nagging by (Palestinian) nableezy who only has a campaign to push his POV down throats of all.

I have no clue who these people are, he tried to lump me with, including more names I saw in your recent contributions, my bad.

His "evidences" because I insisted to be right on talk of pan-Arabism is senseless, it was he, who was persistant from my coming here to wikipedia with his "welcoming" message of "did you have a prior account?" which only invited me even more into the issue of pan Arabism's bloody history and present.

These two factors have led me to be more active on pan arabism, your posting on my user page with that strange question, and Sean.hoyland asking me to respond on the discussion of pan Arabism. How then, does my argument there constitute "proof" that I sock?

Well, nableezy, I am sure the fight for truth will go on, I am confident that third eyes see what's going on, they're not stupid. The "evidence" of me supporting opinions of those that were blocked by you are not only ridiculuos to base blocking-actions on, but it may just prove that your push to block all those people wern't justified to begin with, I hope that all those that see your terrorizing behaviour will realize that I made a mistake by agreeing with you on a few links to be removed from the pan-Arabism, I shlould have been more aggressive, this is a leson to be learned not to be soft on propagandists racists like you, as long as we have such Arabs that can't be self critic, nothing is going to change in our world, and the victims of oppressive pan-Arabism: Copts, Assyrians, Shia Arabs, Iranians, Kurds, Berbers, Jews, Africans, and all others that are not "in line" will suffer, conflicts will rise again and again, wars and bloodshed won't stop.

It might be just so typical of a militant Palestinian that draws Arabs to such despicable trends, beliefs, self destructiveness.

By his extremism he vilifies the Palestibe cause as well, making it look like part of his racism personality. Now you can delete this, coward! Rocalisi (talk) 07:28, 19 April 2010 (UTC)