User talk:Anittas

This user has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia.
(see: block log • contributions • deleted contributions • autoblocks)

Per discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Re:_Anittas.C2.A0.28talk.C2.A0.C2.B7_contribs.29 of your conduct and comments such as [1], [2], [3] and [4], I have reimposed the indefinite block on your account. This takes into account the fact you have been indefinitely blocked for your actions in the past by Jimmy Wales, and only recieved a let off after 9 months with a pledge of good behaviour. It is clear this pledge has not been adhered to. Racism and hatespeech are not tolerated on Wikipedia - I suggest you find another forum for your views. Neil ☎ 16:00, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is completely crazy. We all agree that Anittas had some racist comments, but we also knew that he was an effective editor (have a look at his user page to see what actually he did for Romania and its history here on wikipedia). I mean, what the heck, we don't block extremely disruptive users such as User:Anonimu, but we block Anittas, because he had he's own bad moments. As links 1,2,3 and 4 stated by User:Neil do not represent vandalism, this block was made abusively. So, to be clear, I do not support racism at all, but we should always give a second chance to such effective/experienced users. --Eurocopter tigre 16:13, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anittas has had numerous chances, let alone second ones. The block was not for vandalism. Anittas has been indefinitely blocked before, and was only let off following a pledge of good behaviour. Racism is not tolerated. It does not matter how many good contributions one makes - it is not a case of building up credit so you can say what you like. Neil ☎ 16:20, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, but links 1,2,3 and 4 do not represent racism. I suggest undoing your actions and make other ones based on something true. An affirmation such as "All muntenians are mammals" doesn't merit an indef block, but an medium-length one would be addequate (2 weeks/one month or something similar). --Eurocopter tigre 16:32, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You and Nat have been manipulated into thinking that I've made racist remarks based on what one person said. How can one be racist against his own ethnicity? Adrian and another user went to the RfC which was supposed to be about Anonimu and started to provoke me, because I suggested that the parties should try to find a compromise. He specifically said that he wants to gather proof for my misconduct; and so he got one. After that, he started misquoting me and make claims that I made racist remarks. For example, he said that I made racist remarks when mentioning that a large population of Bucharest is of Asian origin, but that was not meant as a racist remark and the context was entirely different from what he made it to be; moreover, the comment was based on a source which I have read in a book. See here. If you had read the entire discussion at the RfC, you would have noticed when I said that "we are the same people" when referring to Muntenians. The next time you consider blocking someone, I suggest you make a deeper research into the matter to better understand the context, instead of taking everything at face-value. --Thus Spake Anittas 16:28, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Eurocopter, I don't believe such drastic action should have been undertaker. I have expressed my own views on the AN. TSO1D 16:27, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Adrian now accuses me of continuing being uncivil because I removed his comments from my talkpage. Other than doing that, I said nothing to him, except for asking him not to post on my talkpage--a request I have made in the past. He reverted me once and that's against some Wiki rule, but it's okay. Adrian also finds it offensive to call people by their nationalities or for the region that they hail from, so it's no wonder that he finds many things as being offensive and uncivil. Quote: "I find [it] abusive to call people by nationalities or [for the] region where they come from, please restrain from doing this" --Thus Spake Anittas 17:15, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bummer. Dahn 20:36, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll second that. Muntenian number two, a.k.a. Turgidson 21:37, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Will be unblocked: abuse of admin force

"Per discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Re:_Anittas.C2.A0.28talk.C2.A0.C2.B7_contribs.29 of your conduct and comments such as [1], [2], [3] and [4],". Let me quote the "[1,2,3,4]" in question:

Man, you've been repeating that for a thousand time and still, no-one gives a damn to what you say. Just don't start working for the Hague. You will bring it to ruin. Your arguments are laughable. --Thus Spake Anittas 21:56, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think this article misses a few important things, such as the subject on straydogs; orphans and streetchildren; gangs, organized crime and corruption; poor infrastructure; arrogance of the city's inhabitans; and lastly, the Asian influence of the city: in both culture and genetics. --Thus Spake Anittas 10:51, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Biru...err, I mean, Turgidson. Sorry, I made a copy-and-paste. Turgidson, see my reply to Adrian. My comment is sourced. I don't understand why he thinks it's a racist thing to say that Bucharestneans have Asian influence. Is he implying that it would be a bad thing? In that case, he's being racist. Perhaps we should start a RfC on him. --Thus Spake Anittas 18:50, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I find it utterly ridiculous to impose an infinite block for the above. Indefinite blocking of an established editor without reasonable hearing is inadmissible. Arguments ad Jimbonem are invalid.

I myself had some encounters of animosity with this editor (in fact many Romaninan POV pushers just hate my guts) but I am going to unblock the account unless someone presents solid arguments why not. `'Míkka >t 22:51, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mikka, as you have seen from my replies to that AN topic, I agree with you, this action seems to me to have been extremely excessive. The decision to block a user indefinitely cannot simply be made based on arguments such as: "yes, this infraction is minor, but it breaks the camel's back", or "Jimbo blocked him once, so if Anittas as much as one wrong step, his head must come off." I actually considered lifting the block myself as I did not consider that anything close to enough evidence or arguments had been provided to justify this ban, however my lack of impartiality had already been brought up and in the face of those heated debates I did not wish to get into a wheel war. Anyway, I just wanted to say that I agree with your position here. TSO1D (talk) 23:33, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think you should bring this up at WP:ANI rather than doing it unilaterally, lest you provoke a wheel war. Raymond Arritt (talk) 23:53, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I put a notice at the blocker's talk page I am going to wait for his answer until after holidays. `'Míkka >t 06:00, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I feel like a banned episode of Sesame Street. :p Mikkalai, I'm flattered by your attention of goodwill, but there's no need to join the quicksand that I'm stuck in. The ways of Wikipedia have grown from the root and what you see here is just the fruit. It's time to let it go and cherish whatever good memories there are to be cherished. I would also like to thank User:Eurocopter tigre, User:TSO1D, User:Dpotop, and even User:Dc76 for their support. --Thus Spake Anittas (talk) 06:29, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A side view: I had my share of conflict wit Annitas in the very beginning of my editing history, in the Battle of Vaslui. However despite his attitude I noticed he is a knowledgeable and enthusiastic editor, and after a couple of biting exchanges in the talk page we parted without much grudge. I don't think that indefinite block without open community discussion is an appropriate approach, especially in view of Durova scandal, which also involved some mysterious consensus of admins behind the curtains. Mukadderat (talk) 23:40, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXI (November 2007)

The November 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot 00:05, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image Stephen-the-great.jpg

Hi, I nominated for deletion a non-free non-commercial image which was used in Battle of Vaslui. Then I noticed it was you who contacted the autrof of the picture. Can you ask him to release under wikipedia-compatible license (GFDL or creative commons of suitable number)? Mukadderat (talk) 23:40, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you read the summary of the disclaimer. --Thus Spake Anittas (talk) 05:09, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXII (December 2007)

The December 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:59, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by February 14! TomStar81 (Talk) 01:25, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIV (February 2008)

The February 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:59, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXV (March 2008)

The March 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:25, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]