Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Ehud Lesar/Evidence

Content disputes
Arbcom cases are not for arguing content unless it's a matter specific to the case. Stick to the issues of the arb case. If not, I may remove their posting(s). — Rlevse  •  Talk  • 17:22, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * The case was accepted to discuss the block only. Please do not turn this into Azerbaijan-Armenia 3. The actions of editors in this dispute is not the issue here. Nishkid64 (talk) 19:39, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Agreed that this case should not become a wide-ranging discussion of ongoing Armenia-Azerbaijan disputes. However, as indicated on Questions to the parties on the Workshop, I would like to see some evidence as to whether Ehud Lesar's editing was disruptive. Newyorkbrad (talk) 20:55, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

On the evidence
Before the committee deliberates (it's too soon though), it should keep something in mind. AdilBaguirov tainted my Wiki-experience, he had me and Eupator almost banned. He attempted with his socks to drag Marshall and Vartan into revert wars to have them restricted. He was mostly responsible for the first AA1, and his influence was even responsible of AA2, and now a third arbitration case. Some Armenian users have edited much less or have stopped editing altogether because of him.

So when judging my "harassment" towards Ehud, it should have this in consideration. I also caution it to pay more close attention to Grandmaster’s evidence, he is distorting everything. For example I never accused Elsanturk of being Adil, I said that there is evidence that he is implicated (I meant meatpuppeting for Adil) but dropped this as I tried to restrict it to Ehud. - Fedayee (talk) 17:22, 2 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I provided links to every line that I quoted, I suggest they are checked by anyone interested. Grandmaster (talk) 18:00, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

User:Fadix
So Fadix is back, with new conspiracy theories:

For those interested, Cornell, De Waal, Shaffer etc., are all authors who have personal relations with Grandmaster and the other members.

I really wish I personally knew all those people :)

Grandmaster (talk) 07:11, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Fadix
An account identifying itself as banned Fadix has opened a section on the evidence page. I have blocked the account and opened a SSP. Whether or not the content added here should be removed is a decision I'll leave to another clerks. John Vandenberg (talk) 06:43, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Fadix is a banned user, per arbcom ruling, I've cut his comments. — Rlevse  •  Talk  • 15:04, 10 February 2008 (UTC)