User:The Thadman/Complaints

neurofunk article and editor bakemono.
hi steve. my name is robert soares and im registered as kridian since aug 2006. im the sole writer of the techstep subgenre by the name of neurofunk. i also happen to be a member of bassist producer bill laswell´s crew for 14 yrs, involved in more than 50 full length album productions including drum&bass. to check my credentials you can pls go to: www.innerhythmic.com, click on "contacts" and you will find my name, robert soares, as rep for germany. im also co-owner of this label.

im writing you because of a dispute with editor bakemono. i am not a vandal but the only writer of the neurofunk article. i requested help from the community but no one was willing to help me so i did it own my own without registering my name since i believed it was not necessary but now i regret it because i cant prove that i have over, perhaps, 400 edits over my own article while i am indeed, unfortunately, the sole writer. bakemono only edited - added false info on signature recordings - while going to war with me as far as reverting pages - with my sole writing because he never made any substantial contribution to the article.

his personal view is that neurofunk does not exist. he claims that its only a subgenre of techstep while in reality, techstep is a subgenre of drum&bass - among many other drum&bass subgenres. for this matter, pls check the main drum&bass article. he also believes that european artists cannot produce quality drum&bass - even though prominent uk labels are signing american and europan dnb artists everyday - while i registered because he was accusing me of an invisible vandal.

so now theres a dispute which turned ugly - even though my article was approved and praised on the www.dsci4.com neurofunk uk forum on a 14 page thread - and i dont know exactly what to do because it seems that just about anyone with a personal view can edit. also, prominent techstep artist TYPECELL posted a complaint on bakemono´s talk page that he was adding wrong info about his music while requesting bakemono to leave his personal opinions about him out of talk pages and to write the correct info about his music by checking his web page. bakemono deleted typecell´s comment because it wasnt good for his cause.

if you check the history of the article, you will see that everything in red is related with my writing and editing while everything which is in blue, features bakemono´s editing. i am not very good in web manipulation, im basically a conceptual music producer/a&r man, so bakemono is able to win over me by requesting vandal proof programs among other things when i dont even know how to request for help!! his request for vandal proof was denied since hes not qualified - he has less than 250 edits - yet i have perhaps over 400 edits over my sole article. my only editing was over my own literature because i wouldnt dare do any editing on articles without having the basic knowledge about the theme: like bakemono did on neurofunk and as a consequence, drew complaints from a prominent german dnb producer.

im requesting guidence from you. i appreciate it.

thanks robert soares registered as kridian


 * Robert,


 * I apologize for not getting to this sooner. As of late I have been moving into a new apartment and in the past three days I've finally set up internet. If you could give me a small amount of time to do some research into the matter and allow me to get back to you, I will see what assistance I can lend towards solving this problem. :-)


 * Peace,
 *  אמר Steve Caruso  ( desk / AMA )  14:14, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

thanks steve. looking foward to your help on this matter.

robert Kridian

Thad

I think I left this message in thw wrong place. Please excuse me... I am new to this system.

Thanks

XXXXXXX

Thad,

I don't know how to communicate to you. So I hope that you don't mind me leaving a message here. I have just started using wikipedia as a research tool and find it very powerful and helpful. I am just getting used to it.

I have a problem and a concern. It's just ran into someone who appears to exercise authority in Wikipedia who in my opinion is abusing the authority he has. It started with him removing a link I added so quickly that he could not have even looked at it. Followed by a threat to cut off my editing privileges.

What is really strange is that this was about a subject that he obviously has no expertise on or likely interest in.

There are two issues I would like resolve. One is important, one is not. The unimportant one is the entry I was attempting to make. The real important one, is whether this person should have so much power as to make threats and be given the appearance of being able to carry them out. And what other entries and people he way be doing this with.

I am not inclined to got too obsessive about this... but I have just never liked bullies... and I just don't believe that I am his only past or future victim. It's not always served my personal interests, its just that I have never been good at walking away from bullies... and too many bullies in positions of power are never good for any community.

I can be reached at cpart@spamarrest.com. Would you be kind enough to email me. When I receive your email I will be pleased to provide you whatever additional information about me or what happened that you would like.

Thanks

Curt cpart@spamarrest.com

May I get some information about how AMA is supposed to operate?
The Advocate was helpful in telling people to be polite on a couple of talk and discussion pages when others  were attacking me. That was it.

The Advocate never contacted me directly, never answered my email, received and presumably answered email asking questions about me from the newly appointed Arbitrator in my case. This was after I expressed concerns that I felt the Arbitrator was biased against me based on his votes against me and his support of my attackers and stalkers over the last several months. The Arbitrator's first act currently was to open an ANI against me entitled "Mattisse Redux" holding me up to redicule, doing this at the request of my attackers. My Advocate gave no clear explanation of a message the Arbtrator left on my page after I requested clarification, made no comments to me about my questions about bias. After the Arbitrator left a message on my Advocate's page that he was going to email him/her questions about my Advocate's personal opinion of me I requested to withdraw from the Advocacy program. My Advocate then closed my case without comment, subsequently cutting off all  direct contact with me and putting me on wikibreak. Now the Arbitrator has left Wikipedia forever, taking with him all the evidence he could.

To this day, my Advocation has not explained a single thing to me nor ever contacted me (aside from the "Welcome to AMA" message). Is this the way the Advocacy process is supposed to work? Is this normal? Please someone tell me what is going on? Thank you. Sincerely, Mattisse 18:41, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

How is AMA supposed to operate? -- am unable to receive any response from the Advocacy program
I have asked this question many times before but have so far been ignored. Now I have found this page and am hopeful of a response. I have never received a response from AMA except for the generic "Welcome" message.

I had an Advocate but the Advocate made no attempt to fullfil my wishes as listed on my AMA request form.

I am greatly disillusioned with the Advocacy Program as well as Wikipedia after my experience with my Advocate. None of my requests listed on my application were fulfilled. Except for the "Welcome message", the Advocate never contacted me directly, never answered my email, never gave me the feedback I requested,  and gave me no useful information.

The Advocate was helpful a few times in telling people to be polite on a couple of talk and discussion pages when others  were attacking me. That was it. I asked to withdraw from the advocacy program after Ars Scriptor, after having filed an ANI against me, sent an email to my Advocate requesting personal information about me.

Now my case is in the "Under Investiagtion" category but, as far as I can tell, this is meaningless and no "investigation" is going to occur.

To this day, my Advocation has not explained a single thing to me nor ever contacted me directly or answered email. He/she has made it plain to me I will never receive any useful information, first because of a problem with his/her browser "diffs", now because he/she is no longer my Advocate. Is this the way the Advocacy process is supposed to work? Is this normal? Please someone tell me what is going on? Thank you. Sincerely, Mattisse 15:08, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

P.S. Because of the Advocate's behavior and ignoring of me and the resulting enormous doubt about the workings of Wikipedia I now have, I have stoppped contributing to Wikipedia. Sincerely, Mattisse 15:08, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Article on Postville, Iowa
Dear Sir,

My name is Catriel Carbonera. I recently came upon an article on Postville, Iowa published under wikipedia.org (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postville%2C_Iowa). I want to bring to your attention two facts: two thirds of the article is dedicated to a political controversy involving Agriprocessors, Inc., and the article is biased against Agriprocessors.

To this date, I have been an avid advocate of Wikipedia.org. I have considered this web-source a reliable source of valuable and objective information. To my disappointment and dismay, the article on Postville, Iowa does not meet my expectations.

I would feel much better if all the political arguments related to Agriprocessors are removed from that link. (I thought you had a panel that would review any articles before being published.) As far as I can tell, political motives and not the truth are rampant in that link. I challenge you to find, in any respectable encyclopedia, articles such as the one on Postville that vilify a respectful company such as Agriprocessors, Inc.

Sincerely, Catriel Carbonera, Ph.D. e-mail: carbonera@uprr.pr

Profanity in Liberia page,
To whom it may concern,

Hi, I don't know how to edit Wiki- ( or if I can ) so I wanted to forward these to someone to check out and probably correct. The article reads "Liberia Sucks" at the end of a paragraph.Thank you for your time.

Doe favored authoritarian policies, banning newspapers and outlawing various opposition parties. His tactic was to brand popular opposition parties as "socialist", and therefore illegal according to the Liberian constitution, while allowing less popular minor parties to remain as a token opposition. Unfortunately for Doe, popular support would then tend to realign behind one of these smaller parties, causing them to be labeled "socialist" in their turn. Liberia sucks.

Problem with User:The Thadman/Give Back Our Membership
You have posted a page declaring that it is wrong that normal people are not members of Wikimedia and thus cannot vote on Wikipedia issues. I would point out WP:NOT and Voting is evil in response to this. I am uncertain that you are doing the right thing with this page and petition. Captain panda  In   vino   veritas  01:59, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

You started by "Investigation" in January & it is now almost April - I have not hear from you since!
Is all this for real? Or is the Investigation "just pretend"? I was your idea to do it in the first place. Sincerely, Mattisse 12:33, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Sock Puppet
I have been accused of being a sock-puppeteer. There is a page on it and everything. The conclusion is based on circumstantial evidence and is a lie. I am not a sock puppeteer. I control only ONE account and I have only ever controlled one account on Wikipedia. I believ that this page is slander and libelous and needs to be removed. Lojah 22:30, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

====Elisa Carrio, spanish version.

Your intervention is needed regarding an article on Elisa Carrio in spanish. The contributions of a friend of mine from argentina were censored and the access is now blocked by some unknown wikipedia inquisitor. Since she requested me to post one of her opinions cause she was scared i obligued and to my surprise my contribution was also deleted. Here in the US freedom of speech is one of my constitutional rights and it has been violated by some wikipedia editor. To my surprise this censor has allowed editing by his friends but certainly not by any other ones. I do believe your intervention is needed in order to prevent this crime from taking place at this time. Again the page is "elisa carrio" in spanish. Despite she is a controversial politician i believe wikipedia should not be used for political propaganda and if somebody has different opinions and considers the article as incorrect she should be allowed the right to write her opinion. Please, be aware that freedom of speech is one of our civil rights.