User talk:BrotherLee65
BrotherLee65 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I am https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User:TheLastOfTheGiants, I have been banned for: Romanian nationalist POV, copyrighting material and insulting another user. :In regards to my main issue "Romanian nationalist POV", I have been accused by tgeorgescu of Romanian POV, while I was arguing that I was marely trying to establish NPOV in a page already with Hungarian POV. In regards to my copyright material, after I have been reported, I was told by other users (non-admins) that I should read the source and reproduce it with my own words rather than copy-paste the source, which I agreed to but it was too late. In regards to insulting another user I have been mad because the admin tended to believe tgeorgescu that I'm supporting a Romanian POV since he's an older user of Wikipedia, but now I'm calm and cool. :After I was banned, tgeorgescu accused another account of being a sockpuppeteer of mine, not the case, you can check the IP. :I would like to present what happened shortly after I was banned in order to demonstrate that I'm not Romanian POV but NPOV: https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Transylvania&diff=1101888783&oldid=1101399816 :1. The parts "the Daco-Roman Continuity Theory mainly accepted in Romanian histography" and "the Immigrationist theory mainly accepted in Hungarian histography" were removed. Not very relevant. :2. The part "voivode Gelou ruled part of Transylvania before the Hungarians arrived and conquered Gelou's duchy, historians debate whether Gelou was a historical person or an imaginary figure" was rewritten as "voivode Gelou ruled part of Transylvania before the returning Hungarians arrived, historians debate whether Gelou was a historical person or an imaginary figure". :This is false. :You can check the original source here: https://www.academia.edu/2928284/The_Gesta_Hungarorum_of_Anonymus_the_Anonymous_Notary_of_King_B%C3%A9la :The part where the Hungarians conquered Gelou's duchy (mentioned in the soruce) was removed. And instead the word "returning Hungarians" was added, the book in question never says that the Hungarians were returning. Instead, the book makes it very clear that this is the first time they settled in Pannonia. :3. This sentence "Nevertheless, Romanians constitued a large part of Transylvania's population even on the eve of the Mongol Invasions in 1241, being possibly 66% of the population. [1] was falisifed to: "Nevertheless, Romanians constitued an important part of Transylvania's population even on the eve of the Mongol Invasions". :As you can see, the estimated 66% of the population was removed, even if it's present in the source. And the word "a large part of Transylvania's population" was replaced with "an important part of Transylvania's population". The author, never says "an important". : The word "a large" was changed to "an important" to imply that the Romanians were not necessarily a majority, just an important part, even though the author said they were a majority and specifically gave the 66% of the population number. : The source can be verified here: https://books.google.ro/books?id=3o5lrvuwOVwC&pg=PA9&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false - page 9, early migrations. : quote: "The oldest existant doccuments from Transylvania, dating from the 12th and 13th centuries, make passing reference to both Hungarians and Vlachs. The actual number of persons belonging to each nationality is at best guesswork. A plausible estimate is that the Vlachs constituded about two-thirds of Transylvania's population in 1241 on the eve of the Mongol invasion." : (as you can also see, the text in the article was paraprhased, not added as it was literally written in the book, no copyright issues) : (the reason this was made, is because in Hungarian histography, which supports the Immigrationist Theory, the Vlachs/Romanians have arrived north of the Danube after the Mongol invasion. However, American historian Jean W. Sedlar disagress with them, so Jean W. Sedlar's work was edited to be as vague and possible and in essence not say anything) :4. This sentence was removed: "In Letopisețul Țării Moldovei (1642 - 1647), the Moldavian chronicler Grigore Ureche writes that Transylvania is "more filled with Romanians than with Hungarians".[2]" - Which essentially says that there were more Romanians and Hungarians. The validity of the source can be easily checked. As the source has a literal quote from the book, which can be translated wtih Google Translate. :5. This sentence was falisifed: "In 1650, Vasile Lupu wrote in a letter to the Sultan that the Romanians numbered more than one-third of the population of Transylvania.[3]" - The word "already" was added. To imply that the Romanians used to be a minoritiy before they became a majority (as in:they used to be less than 1/3rd and now they are already 1/3rd). However, in the original source, the author never says "alraedy". It's a completely made up word by the editor. : The text that was paraphrased for wikipedia reads as such: It may be added, that in Transylvania more than one-third are Romanians, to whom freedom was promised, and they will stir up without delay against the Hungarians, and thus they will have war at home and abroad, they will not know where they ought to turn themselves. Matthias is wholly in the service of the Hungarians and Poles, having confidence in them and his followers bringing in treasures. But I with my whole family have in Turkey [Turciam], from whom we were granted dominion, and are left to die near them and in front of them. These things are to be considered by the most powerful emperor and his vezirii to propagate the ends of the empire in this way. I offer fidelity and service. : No where is the word "already" present in the text. :6. These 2 paragraphs which implies there is an ongoing debate with no definitive answer were removed: "In Hungarian histography, the original population of Hungarians during the Hungarian conquest was of about 500.000 people and they were always the ethnic majority in Transylvania until around 1650 - 1750 when the Romanians became the majority due to migrations from Wallachia and Moldavia. This is largely based on one numeric figure survived belonging to Dzaihani, who gave accounts as (...)" :7. What the Romanians did during the 1848 revolution was removed "The Romanian population was generally supportive of the Hungarian revolution until the Hungarians made the incorporation of Transylvania into Hungary as one of their war aims. As reactionary sentiments started to emerge, the Romanian lawyer Avram Iancu rallied the peasants around him and pledged his allegiance to the Habsburg in hopes (...)" :8. What Transylvanian Romanians did in World War 1 was removed: "In Austria-Hungary, ethnic Romanians entered the war from the very beginning, with hundreds of thousands of Transylvanian and Bukovinian Romanians being mobilized throughout the war. Although most Transylvanian Romanians were loyal to the Austro-Hungarian Empire, over time, reactionary sentiments emerged, especially after Romania joined the war in 1916. Many of the previously loyal soldiers decided that it was much better to risk their lives through desertion" : Given these circumstances, am I promoting a Romanian POV, or am I promoting a NPOV while others are promoting a Hungarian POV by removing valid and non-copyrighted sources that speak well of the Romanians? tgeorgescu who claims to be netural, was quick to report me for Romanian POV, but doesn't seem to care about this blatant turning of the page in a Hungarian POV. : I only got personal back then because I was accused of Romanian POV when in fact I was doing the opposite, but I calmed down now and will keep everything impersonal. : I did attept to restore part of this: https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Transylvania&diff=1103408502&oldid=1103353525 was reverted because sock. I asked if any of the information was factually incorrect or copyrighted (the things I was originally accused of ), was reverted because sock. : I understand this unban appeal is very long, however, the reason is very long is because I need to prove with evidence that I'm not a "Romanian nationalist POV" and I can't do that in only 500 words. BrotherLee65 (talk) 16:26, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Creating a sock account to appeal a sockpuppetry block is a complete nonstarter. I've now blocked this account directly. I suggest you consider the standard offer.Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:50, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
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.
- Not to mention you posted this appeal while also socking using User:MonarchistMoe. You will not be unblocked outside of a standard offer scenario linked in my decline of your appeal.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:55, 9 August 2022 (UTC)