Wikipedia:AMA Requests for Assistance/Requests/November 2006/Swadhyayee

Wikipedian filing request:



Other Wikipedians this pertains to:



Wikipedia pages this pertains to:



Questions:
Have you read the AMA FAQ?
 * Answer: Yes

'''How would you describe the nature of this dispute? (policy violation, content dispute, personal attack, other)'''
 * Answer: Content dispute, personal attack, sock-puppetry, meta-puppetry.

'''What methods of Dispute Resolution have you tried so far? If you can, please provide wikilinks so that the Advocate looking over this case can see what you have done.'''
 * Answer: Mediation case closed by Addhoc between 6 to 8th Nov. 06 seeing the improvement. Case link I am not able to provide now.

What do you expect to get from Advocacy?
 * Answer:

1) Extn. of time for http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser#HeBhagawan (The deadline set is 10/11/2006.)

2) presentation of dispute in the above matter.

Summary:
I started editing around 4th Oct. 06 the article "Hinduism". My all edits were reverted by HeBhagawan. My inclusions of matter of general knowledge of Hindus are removed on citation ground. When I question their citation, either they ignore or provide non-varifiable citation (at least non-varifiable by me). HeBhagawan has been editing the article some what earlier. Since, the article is taking shape, few editors are interested that the work go on. The article is nominated by Seadog for FAC. Under this pretext HeBhagawan do not allow my edits i.e. removal of erroneous or redundant matters or inclusion of worthy matters.

In a case of vote, editors not connected to Hinduism edits came in and voted in support of HeBhagawan. HeBhagawan had at the suggestion of Dgizza (spelling ?) placed invitation on talk pages of nearly 35 to 40 editors. Incivil comments were passed by HeBhagawan. One Apandey was too incivil. Chris also mis-represented admin community.

During vote an account RamRamji was opened. He voted in support of Apandey and vanished for ever. As far as I remember, his only edit was this voting.

I feel that HeBhagawan is getting support as person from his friends or associates and not on merits.

I approached mediation. Addhoc did not do anything but for watching I presume. The case was closed between 6th to 8th Nov. 06 in the hopes that there was improvement of relations.

HeBhagawan on 3rd and 4th Nov. 06 presented Zen Star award to Apandey for contributing to Hinduism and showing extreme patience in case of dispute. In fact Apandey has not contributed or edited Hinduism and he has been grossly incivil against me on talk page. I believe, Apandey is sock-puppet or meta-puppet of HeBhagawan. HeBhagawan on 3rd and 4th Nov.06 freely awarded Barnstar to number of editors for just on "rv" and for one revert of my edit. Which is cited on the case page. My case page is incomplete and I have so stated on my case page. This act of awarding Barnstar was for lobbying and a could be seen as a corrupt practice (awarding Barnstar without hard or important work).

I want that right connotations of Hinduism take place in the article, falsity or improper inclusions which would belittle the image of Hinduism be removed and Wikipedia being free software the article be allowed for edit to all (monopolising of article by HeBhagawan be brought to an end).

Discussion:
preferably by e-mail to swadhyayee1001 (at) hotmail.com or if not convenient to place a message on my talk page.

Followup:
When the case is finished, please take a minute to fill out the following survey:

Did you find the Advocacy process useful?
 * Answer:

Did your Advocate handle your case in an appropriate manner?
 * Answer:

On a scale of 1 (worst) to 5 (best), how polite was your Advocate?
 * Answer:

On a scale of 1 to 5, how effective do you feel your Advocate was in solving the problem?
 * Answer:

On a scale of 1 to 5, how effective do you feel the Advocacy process is altogether?
 * Answer:

If there were one thing that you would like to see different in the Advocacy process, what would it be?
 * Answer:

If you were to deal with this dispute again, what would you do differently, if anything?
 * Answer:

AMA Information
Case Status: closed

Advocate Status:
 * Accept / Fred-Chess 13:30, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

swadhyayee 13:51, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Closed / Fred-Chess 16:47, 28 November 2006 (UTC)