Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Personal attacks

This page is intended to get attention quickly when dealing with personal attacks. It is not intended to serve as a form of mediation or a type of RFC. Only Personal attacks are dealt with on this page, on their own merits in accordance with Wikipedia's No Personal Attacks policy For editors who want a personal attack situation reviewed: Consider that in most cases, ignoring the attack is better than requesting sanction against the attacker. Do not report people if you are likewise guilty of hostility towards them. Make sure the user has actually commited a personal attack. (Please note that "personal attacks" are defined only under the WP:NPA policy. If a statement is not considered a personal attack under the intended spirit of this policy, it does not belong here.) The editor must have been warned earlier. The {{npa2}}, and {{npa3}} templates may be appropriate for new users; for long-term editors, it's preferable to write something rather than using a standard template. Reports of unwarned editors may be removed. If the behavior hasn't stopped, add the following header to the New Reports section of this page in the following format: ==={{User|NAME OF USER}}=== replacing NAME OF USER with the user name or IP address concerned, with a brief reason for listing below. Be sure to include diffs. If an editor removes the IP or username and doesn't handle the matter to your satisfaction, take it to the editor's talk page or the administrators' noticeboard, but do not re-list the user here. NB - Due to misunderstanding of these instructions and/or mis-use of this process, comments not in strict adhereance to these instructions WILL be removed. This page deals only with personal attacks under the policy WP:NPA. Reports deemed to be inappropriate for this page are liable to be moved to an appropriate venue where one exists. For those reported on this page: A reviewer or an administrator will review each report on this page. In dealing with the report, the contribution history of the reported user shall be checked along with the diffs provided in the report. Where no personal attack is evident, then no action will be taken - however, should an administrator see that another seperate issue is evident, appropriate action or advice for that issue may be taken/given at his or her discretion and in line with wiki policy. Reports on this page stand on their own merits in accordance with Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. As such, disputes and discussions over reports are not suitable for this page except for such comments left by admins or reviewers describing their actions and/or findings. If you notice your account reported at this page, please trust that the administrators and reviewers dealing with reports will deal with it in an even-handed and fair manner on the basis of policy alone. If you feel strongly that another "side to the story", issue, or another piece of information is missing from a report please refrain from posting here, and instead leave your comment on your talk page under the title NPA Report or another other clear and related title. The reviewing party will see this message and take it into account where applicable. For users handling assistance requests: For each of the users linked here, open their contributions and check for personal attacks. Also check if the users have been sufficiently warned for the current personal attack and whether they've continued to commit personal attacks after being warned. Note that there is an important difference between a user who makes many good contributions and a few personal attacks, and a user whose last edits are (nearly) all personal attacks or other conflict. Do nothing, warn them again, or, if you are an adminstrator, block the user in question as you think is required. Explain things carefully to the user who listed the attacker if you feel there's been a misunderstanding. Move the report to the Open Reports section and give an update to the status of the report. Delete old reports that have been dealt with. Please consider adding this page to your watchlist to make life easier for non-administrator RC-patrollers.

New reports

Éponyme (talk · contribs)

User:Éponyme was blocked recently for violating WP:NPA and WP:CIVIL after multiple warnings (block log). After coming back from the block, Éponyme has continued to be incivil and make personal attacks, most notably at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/American (ethnic group). This attack from several hours ago against Gerdbrendel is particularly gross, stating that the German-American Brendel should "Go back home and leave us alone. You obviously do not acclimate to our culture, nor our customs and constantly berate us for it." Here is another recent example of a personal attack by Éponyme. These attacks deserve a second block. · j e r s y k o talk · 21:36, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Rastishka (talk · contribs)

A little over a week ago, I posted a complaint here regarding User:Rastishka making personal attacks on me. This person has resumed personal attacks on me as of today, so I'm back here to file another report as Konstable suggested I do in such a case. See here (scroll to the bottom) for my original complaint. [1]

As you can see, User:Konstable blocked him for one week for personal attacks. He has been blocked in the past by User:Alex Bakharev for 3RR, edit warring and personal attacks. If you view his talk page User talk:Rastishka, you can see that it is filled with nothing but warnings, block messages, and requests from bots asking him to fix his unsourced image uploads.

Here is his newest attack on me, falsely accusing me of "trolling" and "vandalizing":

[2]

He also continues to edit war at Debbie King, providing no basis for the notability of his edits. TheQuandry 18:55, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Open reports

75.3.23.157 (talk · contribs)

Repeated personal attack on my Talk page: calling me "ignorant" and "your hateful nature shines through in every message." 75.3.23.157 already has NP3 warning on their Talk page. Yonmei 17:08, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

after I reverted their vandalism (vaguely insulting - calling me ignorant} http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Lordkazan&diff=prev&oldid=75725858 {direct attack against my person} http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Lordkazan&diff=prev&oldid=75726763

(edit) fixed ip! doh Lordkazan 17:12, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

• Comment Please also see my talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:CaveatLector#Chris_Kattan where this user has insinuated that I am a member of the Ku Klux Klan (also connecting LGBT activisits with the Klan (?????) and thereby indirectly insulting a good portion of the WP community). Also please note the user's talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:75.3.23.157 where several other users have also experssed to the user displeasure with personal attacks launched against them after reversion of his/her vandalism, even after the Wiki policy was quoted to him/her. CaveatLector^Talk 21:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

  User is also harassing Yonmei Lordkazan 23:20, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

I should point out that Lordkazan was vandalizing wikipedia by reverting many of my edits which were valid. 75.3.23.157 01:08, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Just because you assert an edit to be valid, doesn't make it so Lordkazan 13:20, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Actually, Lordkazan, you really shouldn't be talking, you think that something is true and sourced is not a valid edit? You have equally done as much vandalism as me. You also need to be warned that you should not revert all edits by one person, even if they are valid, just because you are upset that that user is more knowledgable than you in one area. 75.3.23.157 16:38, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

I didn't connect gay activist with the klan. I connect people such as CaveatLector that although they are gay, they would be liked by the klan because of negative views towards African-Americans, Jews, Catholics, Hispanics, and immigrants. I didn't say that CaveatLector was a member of the klan, just that they'd like him. I could be wrong and CaveatLector could hold similiar views to the KKK because perhaps his father was a member and they probably wouldn't like him then for straying from the flock. 75.3.23.157 01:44, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

75.3.23.157 claimed in Edit summaries and on my Talk page that I must be anti-Catholic because I was reverting the vandalism of Mychal F. Judge page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Yonmei (talk • contribs) 05:14, September 15, 2006 (UTC)

Éponyme (talk · contribs)

This users has blantantly tried to attack me. He used prohanity and made comments against me based on my national origin, describing me as "goddamned asshole from Europe trying to apply imperialist arrogance." After issuing the {{npa2}}, he promptly deleted it, adn issued the same warning to me, despite myself staying civil. He also promtly removed the warning. Here are the difs: [3], [4], [5], [6] after being issued {{npa3}} he made his post a bit nastier: [7], [8], [9]. He also continues to abstain from a civil discussion: [10], [11], [12] Please take action if you could, thank you. Best Regards, Signature^brendel 00:01, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I suppose that the "incorrigible" nature of this editor in applying separate standards for style (because Americans are so different), as well as general ignorance of my ethnic roots, making disparaging comments about the nature of it and saying he knows more than I, a native American unlike he. His inflammatory comments were the first such in my life that I ever took a stand against with respect to my American ethnicity and United States citizenship. I also voted for George W. Bush and I'm sure that will weigh against me here. Then again, Jimbo is a Randian and would understand where I'm coming from in contrast to hyphenated Americans--as he is an ethnic American like me. You know, don't bother defending America's colonial ethnics from pre-1776 or at least before the first census in 1790. Just support all these immigrants and downgrade the folks who gave them a country to move to. Goddamn, I am really hurt. Stop it--I am the victim here. Éponyme 01:36, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

There is currently an RfC on this article, which I filed; All 4 Users have agreed with me that the article's title is misleading, yet he keeps pushing that the title be kept in an uncivil manner. This is how he (the user above) responded to 3rd party comments from the RfC I filed: [13], [14] After a fifth user spoke out in favor of changing the title, this is how the user responded: [15] Best Regards, Signature^brendel 02:43, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

The nature of those responses to the situation, truly delineates their apathy to my position. I stand in defense of what unsympathetic people don't care if they tarnish or not. They want to call the American people illegitimate. This type of discussion would not be tolerated in the 1950s. All the opposing positions to my one position would have been rightfully ostracized for making callous, ignorant and anti-American statements. Éponyme 02:50, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I just warned Éponyme with {{npa4}} after Éponyme insinuated that I was anti-American at Talk:American people#Responding from the RfC. Éponyme's response was to place the same template, without any factual basis, at my talk page.[16] Éponyme has been asked by multiple users at Talk:American people to calm down and discuss things civilly. Éponyme has not done so. · j e r s y k o talk · 03:08, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

How can you disassociate yourself from my situation, so apathetically and continue to bash at me like I'm some lab rat and the fate of my people is an intellectual phenomena? You should be blocked for such intolerant assertations. You bring it upon yourself for joining the lynchmob on a true blue American, who only wants to ensure the story of his people gets fair treatment and no more! Éponyme 03:12, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I would also note that Éponyme has been warned multiple times at his or her talk page, but Éponyme has removed each npa notice placed there. · j e r s y k o talk · 03:16, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

OOH YEAH, take that! When you jump on the bandwagon and run into the same walls, maybe it is time to try less hypocritical and apathetic strategies. Éponyme 03:39, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I have blocked Éponyme for twenty-four hours. Tom Harrison ^Talk 15:16, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Éponyme has returned

This user was blocked two days ago and is still making false, offending, accusations towards me. (I do know if I should start a new reoprt or continue on the "open" report below) Here the difs: [17], [18], [19]. After warning him for being uncivil he simply returned those warning on my talk page: [20], [21], [22] If you could please look at this case again I would appreciate it. Thank you, Signature^brendel 01:54, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

This guy has been making many severe insults, such as false analogies and relativism about ethnic identity. I believe his arguments to be of the new and revisionist social science, that diminishes ethnicity and focuses more on the human experience apart from "social constructs". This inaccuracy with his argumentations result in the debasement of my people and my country, by insinuating that my country is a whorehouse of vagabonds. To top it off, it is further enraging that he has tried to abolish the non-notional, but extant social sector of America descended from those responsible for giving him a country to emigrate to. An American's hero would be George Washington or Benjamin Franklin, or Anthony Wayne, or Robert E. Lee, or Oliver Hazard Perry, or Henry Clay; a German-American's hero would be Otto von Bismarck or at least Baron von Steuben, or John Jacob Astor, or Wernher von Braun. This man Brendel is an immigrant trying to basically "educate the natives" about their people and land, which means he is talking down to me and essentially all whitebread Americans. I would welcome his American hyphen if he learnt to tolerate our customs and sense of being, rather than be such a dictator on terms that are only expounded by new social engineering. I need not tell those other Americans that his imperialist attitude to my "colonial" self is unappreciated and actively hostile. There is no more intolerance I recieve than meddlesome ignorance from a foreigner like this, through my day after day existence. I recieve German tourists every week at my place of employment. Thank God they do not interfere with judgements about the status of Americans vis a vis hyphenated Americans. If they did, I would refuse service and do without the patronage. That should be enough to explain how Brendel is way out of line and rude above all, naivete being no excuse--but arrogance a surely more accurate depiction of his attempts to eradicate the American people from a place here on Wikipedia. He may say he loves America, but he does not make for a welcome stay and express congeniality to his hosts. His hosts are not hyphenated Americans, but Americans themselves. I cannot account for those Americans who hate their identity and ANACHRONISTICALLY choose to trace their heritage to Europe, but that is probably a further reason why Americans are increasingly a minority in their own homeland--according to the U.S. Census Bureau at least. Hyphenation of George Washington to English American is an anachronism. Please don't accept anachronisms as entirely accurate. Patrick Henry would be so incensed with this rabble rouser as to demand a duel and whoop this man's ass for such impudence! He knows not! His attitude is more or less the same as Britons calling Americans "colonials". I would tell anybody like that to fuck off. The difference between Brendel and myself, is that I am unashamed to be called a "cowboy", but he would be insulted to be compared to true Americans. Germany is not a country which supplied America with cowboys (Germany supplied us with merchants, miners and mercenaries--during the Civil War especially)--we had them here when 1776 rolled around. Go ahead and spit on this cowboy. Éponyme 08:03, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

From above: "Patrick Henry would be so incensed with this rabble rouser as to demand a duel and whoop this man's ass for such impudence! He knows not! His attitude is more or less the same as Britons calling Americans "colonials". I would tell anybody like that to fuck off."- I find this to be quite uncivil. Regards, Signature^brendel 20:13, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Don't incite a war of words then--you're very offensive and insensitive to be so prejudiced. Éponyme 21:20, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Another offensive comment: [23] Signature^brendel 03:20, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

You're just upset that I don't and won't follow the Frankfurt School. Try to shove it down your own people's throat; I will not take it. Your words and claims are false in almost every respect. You twist and distort to serve a political agenda that should have no place here. Éponyme 06:18, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Mystar (talk · contribs)

Mystar (talk · contribs) has been engaging in a pattern of personal attacks in his contributions and edit summaries. Notable recent examples include this attack on another user, which was an echoing of comments here, this edit summary, and this veiled threat against another user. When this problem first emerged a few weeks ago, Mystar was warned a couple times, and for a while he moderated his tone. On his resumption of attacks, I left a note reminding him of WP:NPA and pointing out specific examples. He replied by denying that he had made attacks and accusing me of using sock puppets and acting in bad faith. I don't dispute that on occasion other editors may have occasionally been over the line in their comments, but I don't believe anyone's contributions have been as persistently virulent and unproductive as Mystar's, and as long as he doesn't believe he has made attacks, I believe he will continue to behave in this manner. Most immediately I'm looking for an admin or other neutral user to weigh in on whether his conduct has been acceptable. Brendan Moody 21:54, 19 September 2006 (UTC) I am now considering other forms of dispute resolution. Brendan Moody 14:27, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Well as you are so fond of stating Moody, offer up all the facts. You seem to keep forgetting that your buddies have been doing the instigating and staging random attacks. Not to mention have attacked me and you have done nothing but warn me. I find it interesting that your group is the only ones creating the unrest. I'm simply trying to keep them from totally demolishing some good pages. If need be I too can cite attacks and abuse. The pot calling the kettle black simply gets everyone covered in soot. Most immediately I’m looking for fairness and integrity...in short honesty! Again I have made no threats against anyone. I did tell the sock puppet WLU who suddenly showed up to edit war to divulge his/her true identity. To be honorable rather than hide. But he/she would much rather play games in his/her sudden attack against the Goodkind pages. As I've said. I have compiled several pages of material of these people planning and encouraging people to vandalize the Goodkind pages on their ASOIAF Message board. They did and I called them out.

I again call them out to edit in good faith. Which all we see is a couple of them edit warring. Deleting and tagging what they see as errors. Look IF you see a problem... stop and fix it! Don't tag it and run... Act in Good Faith! All we see is attacks against the Goodkind pages. If you don't like the way the material reads then edit it. Fix it! Some people only wish to create problems...as we see with Neofreak and WLU.

Stop being part of the problem and help the solution. Also if you are going to tattletale then do so for all parties involved. Show all the abuse... not just the person to who is trying to combat the vandalism. Trying for a high EDIT count is not reason to just go hopping about tossing tags on everything. Mystar 04:51, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Please feel free to post specific diffs that you think constitute personal attacks on you. Indeed, I'll provide one myself. This reply by WLU (talk · contribs) is a rather blatant sarcastic insult, particularly the last sentence. As I've said repeatedly, he shouldn't do that; I'm in the process of writing a note for him to that effect. The reason I did not include him in this request is that he has not been given the required chain of warnings that you have, and has not in my opinion engaged in sufficiently frequent or virulent attacks that this sort of intervention is warranted. I may be wrong about this; reviewers and admins reading this page will have to judge that. But I am not obligated to identify conduct I do not consider egregious enough to warrant intervention simply because you consider it so. You remain free to offer your own commentary, and I encourage you to do so. As a general guide for reviewers and admins, I'll say that articles relevant to the large dispute to which Mystar alludes are Terry Goodkind, George R. R. Martin, Steven Erikson, and some pages related to topics in those authors' works. Brendan Moody 05:12, 20 September 2006 (UTC) See above. Brendan Moody 14:27, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

• Comment: I have not added any {{npa2}} or {{npa3}} templates to Mystar's talk page, or taken any other action, as Brendan Moody has scratched his request, but I'm moving the entire situation to Open Reports for an admin to keep an eye on or handle further as he/she feels may be appropriate. --Aaron 21:47, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

SqueakBox (talk · contribs) and Hagiographer (talk · contribs)

SqueakBox (talk · contribs) was blocked for a week per his personal attack parole (resulting from arbitration) for writing on his user page that one of his achievements was

restoring José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero from the POV of another user who claims to write about saints but who is determined to slur him. [24]

This is a veiled reference to Hagiographer (talk · contribs), who acts exactly like Zapatancas (talk · contribs), the other party in arbitration. Squeakbox modified the reference so it now says,

restoring José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero from the POV of another user who claims to write about saints.

Hgiographer claims this is still a personal attack and changed the user page on his own several times before it was protected. I would like some idea on whether the revised statement is acceptable or whether it sill constitutes a personal attack. No action is required at this time as Squeakbox is currently blocked for other reasons. Thatcher131 (talk) 12:41, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

• Comment: In my opinion, the revised statement remains a personal attack. If nothing else, it implies that Hagiographer (talk · contribs) can't write, which is an insult. But also (and possibly more importantly given that this is an Arbcom matter), it's evidence that SqueakBox (talk · contribs) has little interest in adhering to the spirit of the Arbcom ruling, even if he is willing, under extreme admin pressure, to adhere to the letter of the ruling. If this was a run-of-the-mill matter, I'd slap an {{npa3}} tag on Squeakbox's user talk page in a heartbeat. But given that it's all in arbitration, I'll just leave this here for an admin to make the final decision. --Aaron 22:25, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

128.252.128.243 (talk · contribs)

IP engaged in numerous acts of extreme vandalism, for which I blocked for 48 hours. Then proceeded to lay a personal attack on me [25]. Thought perhaps a longer block might be appropriate, but also thought I should leave it up to other admins, since now I'm "involved". Thanks. --03:19, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Block extended, that's a highly inappropriate edit by the IP user. Gwernol 03:24, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 03:29, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

The page Wikipedia talk:Notice board for India-related topics/Keralacontains lot of personal attacks. Pradeep Somasundaran is a great singer in Malayalam. Somebody is trying to belittle him by using the page Wikipedia talk:Notice board for India-related topics/Kerala Rosalinta 17:32, 21 September 2006 (UTC) Administraters plese remove personal attacks from the above said page.

Storm Rider (talk · contribs)

I am requesting an outside opinion as to whether this (note edit summary as well) and this constitute personal attacks. If so, would someone mind placing the warning (if deemed appropriate)? (it seems too biased coming from me as the target), and if not, would someone please boot me in the behind and ask me to lighten up? Thanks Reswobslc 17:48, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

"Stop feeding the troll" and "Laughable" are not personal attacks, unless said repeatedly and with intent of disruption. See WP:NPA#Examples_of_personal_attacks ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 03:30, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Also, this became a heated topic for a few days - I think short tempers between SR and R and others were understandable. Both should probably have [Wikipedia:A_nice_cup_of_tea_and_a_sit_down|nice cup of tea]] (or a nice cup of hot chocolate). The article is doing better thanks to both of their persistence. -Visorstuff 23:30, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Dhammafriend (talk · contribs)

He has repeatedly characterized my ethnic/religious affiliations in a pejorative manner. First, he wrongly accused me of being an upper-caste Hindu and evoked several anti-Hindu and anti-Brahmanist canards against me here. I warned him here. Then, he made some borderline anti-Semitic remarks concerning my Jewishness here(see bottom). I do not believe that my ethnic/religious affiliation is relevant to my edits on wikipedia, so I believe that these are personal attacks and I request that they be handled accordingly.Hkelkar 16:21, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Update: He has made another ethnic characterization against admins here. In particular note the following statement:

“ Wiki Administrators except Brahmin and Shudra Varnas please take note of this. ”

.This user continues to make these types of characterizations which are attacks on people and are detrimental to discussion on wikipedia.Hkelkar 16:27, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

I think at least some of this is a misunderstanding. I left a mild caution to be more careful. I hope that will be enough. Tom Harrison ^Talk 19:48, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't think so. The racist and hateful comments keep pouring in [26] and in [27] and in [28]. He has continued to pour in the anti-Hindu, racist remarks.Bakaman _Bakatalk 23:05, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

This guy has attacked me, thegreyanomaly multiple times.

User Thegreyanomaly the article "Indian Buddhist Movement" is about Religious movement which is growing in India slowly since last 50 years. If you are anti-Buddhist we certainly don't have any objection about your religion. You can be a Brahmin-Hindu if you are a priest by profession in any temple otherwise you are a Shudra-Hindu because all non-priest i.e. non-Brahmins are SHUDRA in Hindu Religion. In Kali Yuga Hindus have only two Varna as per the religious philosophy of Hindus. If you are from India then you might be knowing that Buddhism in India was totally killed. Some blame Brahmins Or some blame Muslims for that, it is a vast topic of study. I don't want to blame anybody. Hindu Castiesm, Hindu Untouchability and Caste based Graded Inequality became very strong after fall of Buddhism in Indian sub-continent and before British came to India. Education to all non-Brahmins was banned and the rigid Hindu Religious laws made by Brahmins like Manusmriti, VishnuSmriti and other DharmaShastras became the laws to govern the non-Muslim society.

British gave education for all and broke the anti-Human Hindu Laws. After Independence Dr. Ambedkar revived Buddhism in India. He also established "Buddhist Society of India" certainly NOT Navayana Society! So there is no meaning branding the movement as Navayana. Because the founder of India's Buddhist Revival Movement which is certainly against Hindu Casteism and injustice that Hindus are doing since hundreds of years called his movement as Buddhist Movement. Also Dr. Ambedkar said that 'He will convert whole India back to Buddhism' but he was killed just within 6 weeks after his conversion to Buddhism. Some people blamed Brahmins for his death. It is not sure how he died. I dont want to blame anybody. So you can discuss current Buddhist Developments in the article "Indian Buddhist Movement". About Hindu Caste and related things you better write to Hindu Articles Or Caste Related to Articles. If Navayana is a anto-caste publication then you should put that link in Caste Related article.

In India legal system we have Hindus, Muslims, Christens and BUDDHIST as different religion. Expecially our 2001 cencus gives more details about different religions population. We dont have any 'Navayana Buddhist' in whole India neither it is recognized legally anywhere. Officially we have around 1% Buddhists in India. This population unofficially can be 4% also because thousands of people are converting to Buddhism. But lets take official figures.

Caste is a problem of Hindus certainly not the problem of Buddhists. Be a contributor to wikipedia but don't just try to vandalise different articles. Dhammafriend 10:03, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

This one was both on my user talk page and on Talk:Indian Buddhist Movement

I responded to him

Umm... I'm an EX-Brahmin who converted to Theravada Buddhism...

I edited Navayāna into the article because in Buddhism in India : Challenging Brahmanism and Caste by Gail Omvedt (This book is incredibly anti-Caste and is pro-Buddhist) I have read Neo-Buddhism being referred to as Navayana, which is is obviously a non-IAST transliteration of navayāna.

"Ambedkar's Buddhism seemingly differs from that of those who accepted by faith, who 'go for refuge' and accept the canon. This This much is clear from its basis: it does not accept in totality the scriptures of the Theravada, the the Mahayana, or the Vajrayana. The question that is then clearly put forth: is a fourth yana, a Navayana, a kind of modernistic Enlightenment version of the Dhamma really possible within the framework of Buddhism?" (8)

The book blatantly says that Ambedkar DESIGNED what has become known as navayāna.

He did not found the Navayana publishing house. I edited in that there is a Navayana publishing house into the article so people would not confuse, navayāna, yāna, and Navayana, the publishing house.

I'm going to put the navayāna comment back into Indian Buddhist Movement. Please do not edit it out again. Navayāna is an accepted name of neo-Buddhism.

Peace, TheGreyAnomaly

That one was on the Talk:Indian Buddhist Movement and there is more to his response on that page. Please ban him. He is beyond being disciplined

Buddhist do not have caste neither they believe any former caste like Brahmin,Bhangi ,Scheduled Caste, OBC caste etc. So don't claim false things. I have Buddhist friends in America who can certainly verify your identity. So if want to discuss you can also meet our Buddhist friends in America so don't try to fool wikipedia community. Who gave you ordination as Buddhist? Do you know the process to become a Buddhist? Dhammafriend 10:13, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Thegreyanomaly 23:08, 22 September 2006 (UTC), Thegreyanomaly 23:11, 22 September 2006 (UTC), Thegreyanomaly 23:13, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Unless I am mistaken, he has not posted anything since I left my caution on his talk page. Let's see if that helps. Tom Harrison ^Talk 23:22, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

While the complaint is still pending, he just made more ethnic attacks against me. He called me "anti-Buddhist" and characterized my alleged "Caste" by referring to me as a "Brahmin"/"Shudra" (amusingly, I'm not even a Hindu).I am adding diffs to that effect in the PAIN report but I humbly request you to please intervene. His inflammatory comments in the talk page of Talk:Indian Buddhist Movement are making it very difficult for us legitimate editors to create a good article. The diffs of his most recent attacks are below:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AIndian_Buddhist_Movement&diff=77509724&oldid=77417417

In particular, the comments from the diff above:

“ If kelkar Or all anti-Buddhist people who are unaware of the Present Indian Buddhist Movement can come and understand the status. ”

“ anti-Buddhist hate is too much in Brahmin Shudra Hindu minds ”

Referring to both me and User:Nat Krause

and

“ Mr.Hkelkar you are not the first anti-Buddhit person on this planet. ”

“ The Language used by u like which planet etc.. shows you are full hate towards Buddhist so debate is a civilised manner ”

Despite the fact that I have made no attacks against anyone.

Hkelkar 09:37, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Making bogus allegation citing diffs which does not substantiate your claims are also a sort of attack.Now you are just testing the patience of the community with these bogus allegations. Ikon |no-blast 09:54, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Even though it is dhammafreind's NPA I would recommend some action against user:Hkelkar for making ANB a tool of harassing users citing bogus diffs and presenting false cases.Two had been made against me by this user,and it is third now. Ikon |no-blast 10:42, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Let the admins reach that decision.An admin has already spoken to Dhammafriend about this before and he has ignored his words. That alone speaks volumes.10:52, 24 September 2006 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Hkelkar (talk • contribs)

Yes admins are expected to reach some decision else ,wikipedia will become sort of hell with editors like you.I can't expect you to improve(sorry but assuming good faith is very difficult when facts are loaded against it),even though you were specifically warned against bogus reporting by Dab in my case you have not improved. Ikon |no-blast 11:03, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Oh really? Where?Hkelkar 11:10, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Plus, Very bold to say that you will violate WP:AGF on the basis of some vague assertions regarding facts.Hkelkar 11:10, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Wow Go ahead now you are giving live presentation of how you misrepresent rules.WP:AGF does not ask for assuming good faith when the person has got history of bogus reporting. Ikon |no-blast 11:20, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Wow. Now that's what I call circular logic. Using the accusation of "Bogus Reporting" to prove "Bogus reporting".I'm so glad most wikipedians don;t do that, else there'd be chaos ^_^ .Hkelkar 11:22, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

No comments per WP:SNOW,arguing with you is like throwing stone into mud. Ikon |no-blast 11:28, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Since the incivility has continued and become disruptive, I have blocked Dhammafriend for 24 hours. I caution everyone involved to comment only on content, not other people, and to not respond in kind to any attacks. Tom Harrison ^Talk 12:52, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

John_Spikowski (talk · contribs)

John Spikowski constantly personally attacks me and the PanoTools user group f.e.: 1 2 3. He was recently banded for a 3RR.

All this happend after the warning. Roguegeek listed him yesterday but thought this issue is solved. You will easily find the older attacks like this and the comment in this

Thx for your help. --Wuz 01:11, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

I left him an {{npa3}}.--Konstable 04:19, 23 September 2006 (UTC)