Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Diyako

In order to remain listed at Wikipedia:Requests for comment, at least two people need to show that they tried to resolve a dispute with this user and have failed. This must involve the same dispute with a single user, not different disputes or multiple users. The persons complaining must provide evidence of their efforts, and each of them must certify it by signing this page with ~~~~. If this does not happen within 48 hours of the creation of this dispute page (which was: {insert UTC timestamp with ~~~~~}), the page will be deleted. The current date and time is: 23 Mar 2006 10:16 UTC.

• (Cool Cat | talk | contributions)

Users should only edit one summary or view, other than to endorse.

This is a summary written by users who dispute this user's conduct. Users signing other sections ("Response" or "Outside views") should not edit the "Statement of the dispute" section.

• I feel the users in question have repetively stayed hostile/incivil towards all parties not suited to their POV. Users have been warned to stay civil by a number of users but I observed no improvement in their behaviour. On ocasions users rained threats (axamples are given below).
• It could also be said on some occasions users were writing highly biased articles if not pov pushing. In my view users lack the basic understanding of neutrality. On many occasions, users work together in making similar biased edits which could be viewed as systematic bias.

Description

{Add summary here, but you must use the section below to certify or endorse it. Users who edit or endorse this summary should not edit the other summaries, other than to endorse them.}

Evidence of disputed behavior

(Provide diffs. Links to entire articles aren't helpful unless the editor created the entire article. Edit histories also aren't helpful as they change as new edits are performed.)

Ex Diyako (talk · contribs), Xebat (talk · contribs)

Civility

1. Talk:West Azarbaijan/Archive3 is full of examples of personal attacks and threats. See this diff.
   • Few examples from the diff:
     1. In fact I am discussing with a racist Qashqai turk pasdar terrorist pro ahmadinejad who even do not recognize UN emblem and think it is PDK's
     2. Ignore us ignore us.. but after saddam it is your turn.
   • User also discusses the topic in foreign language(s). This is english wikipedia and talk should commence in english so we all understand what the heck they are talking about. Especialy if the topic is contraversial and it appears to be.
2. User was blocked and lenght was extended to a month for continued trolling on talk page.

Neutrality

1. User:Cool Cat/def
   • Source suggests:
     • By 1999, Turkey had largely suppressed Kurdish resistance by extreme terror and ethnic cleansing, leaving some 2 to 3 million refugees, 3,500 villages destroyed (seven times as high as in Kosovo under NATO bombs), and tens of thousands killed, primarily during the Clinton years...
   • Oh by the way this page does not discuss the holiday at all. And only one referance of the word 'Newroz' is made at the notes section.
2. User:Cool Cat/def
   • Cannot tolerate alternative spellings
3. User:Cool Cat/def
   • User considers article merging to be slavery.

blind revers

• Reverted my edit which were minor in nature. If someone else made bad edits he should take the time to fix the issue rather than wipeout my edit.

Applicable policies

{list the policies that apply to the disputed conduct}

1. Wikipedia:No Personal Attacks
2. Wikipedia:Neutral Point of View

Evidence of trying and failing to resolve the dispute

(provide diffs and links)

Users certifying the basis for this dispute

{Users who tried and failed to resolve the dispute}

(sign with ~~~~)

1. Cool Cat^Talk|@ 00:41, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. --Kash 23:15, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ManiF 02:20, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. --InShaneee 18:56, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Other users who endorse this summary

(sign with ~~~~)

1. SouthernComfort 02:44, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Khoikhoi 23:27, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is a summary written by the user whose conduct is disputed, or by other users who think that the dispute is unjustified and that the above summary is biased or incomplete. Users signing other sections ("Statement of the dispute" and "Outside Views") should not edit the "Response" section.

{Add summary here, but you must use the endorsement section below to sign. Users who edit or endorse this summary should not edit the other summaries.}

Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~~~~):

This is a summary written by users not directly involved with the dispute but who would like to add an outside view of the dispute. Users editing other sections ("Statement of the dispute" and "Response") should not edit the "Outside Views" section, except to endorse an outside view.

{Add summary here, but you must use the endorsement section below to sign. Users who edit or endorse this summary should not edit the other summaries.}

Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~~~~):

All signed comments and talk not related to an endorsement should be directed to this page's discussion page. Discussion should not be added below. Discussion should be posted on the talk page. Threaded replies to another user's vote, endorsement, evidence, response, or comment should be posted to the talk page.