Request for CheckUser information processed edit

Hello Alefbe. Your request for CheckUser information has been granted and archived (see result). —{admin} Pathoschild 20:39:00, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Alefbe 05:41, 16 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

hi edit

I see your word about sysop power abuse in checkuser section. I think we must solve problems that accured for my account that blocked for 3month and sandbad for 2week. please save 01:56, 12 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

voting requirements edit

Hello Alefbe, in order to be able to vote, please link to Your account >600 edits of Your home-wiki (You already do, Alefbet@fawiki, I guess) but please also link back to this account here on Meta, many thanks, best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 19:58, 1 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

I have already linked my account in EnWiki (and it already passes the requirement). However, I don't know how to link Alefbet@fawiki (because the username is different from alefbe and it seems that the system can not link it automatically). Alefbe 20:11, 1 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
Hm, the accounts on Alefbe and Alefbet seems not to pass, but Alefbet does, You can link back to this account here by just putting [[m:User:Alefbe]] on the fa:User:Alefbet userpage, best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 20:25, 1 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
Done. Alefbe 20:33, 1 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
Is this already ok? Ojanfar 05:02, 2 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Canvassing edit

Hello Alefbe. A few users have complained that you are canvassing to oppose Mardetanha's steward election. (Canvassing means to systematically confront persons to try to convince them to vote like you.) Canvassing is strongly discouraged, and continuing to do so may lead to your block on this wiki and possibly others. Please respect the voting process and do not canvass. :) —Pathoschild 05:38:17, 02 February 2009 (UTC)

I sent some emails in the first hours of election to some stewards of Metawiki (to give them some basic information), as well as some users of Persian Wikipedia (who knew Mardetanha, but didn't know about this election). Then spacebirdy told me that this is considered canvassing and I shouldn't continue it on Meta, and I didn't send any other email related to this issue on Meta or Persian Wikipedia (other than answering to some questions). I guess you can also look at the detail of my conversation with spacebirdy (she has my permission to send it to anyone she likes). Alefbe 06:04, 2 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hello Alefbe, I would like to remind You that every person has the right to express their opinion and that every person has only one voice, it is IMHO not very respectful to comment every other vote, You had the chance to express Your thoughts, please grant others the same right. Thanks, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 18:36, 2 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

You mean commenting other votes (and their reasons) is restricted to the negative votes? Alefbe 18:38, 2 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
No, I don't like that for the opposes neither, but I don't see why the candidate should not comment there, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 18:39, 2 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
Well, from what I see, those comments (on negative votes) are not limited to the comments by the candidate. Alefbe 18:41, 2 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
Which is why You copy the bad behaviour? Sorry, but to me it looks as if You are doing a campaign there not commenting and I only wanted to let You know that IMHO this is a bad behaviour because I think that every person has one voice only, thanks, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 18:43, 2 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
OK. I respect your opinion and I won't comment again. But what about this? Shouldn't I be able to comment on the allegations against me? Alefbe 18:47, 2 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
IMHO this whole section is a mess and hard to read and to follow for others, but I think it is ok to answer to that since it was directed to You directly, best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 18:49, 2 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
I changed that comment to avoid any perception of irony. Alefbe 02:47, 4 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

re:A question edit

Hello Alefbe, I have answered here, best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 18:58, 2 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

election edit

What i can see is that all fa:wiki comunity is deeply divided about Mardetanha what is quite easy to to unerstand cos of the political situation in Iran. I can see this split among your community but i got very good opinions about his work at meta from my feelow sysops and 'crat (and current steward) from pl:wiki. I dont think he can be a threat for persian wiki especially that he wont be allowed to use steward's tools at his home wiki. Anyway- if he is such a big problem, why he has got support from at least half of fa:wiki community at this election? If You got a problem with him You can solve it at You local wiki (ArbCom, desysop. etc). Meta is dominated by peolpe from western world and i think its not good- thats one of a few reasons (the other is his explanation he sent me by email) why i change my vote. Stewards are well controlled i think, and we have got confiramtion which helps a lot in problematic situation). Regards! Vuvar1 19:38, 4 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Being allowed and having access are two different things. Stewards are recommended that do not use check-user access on their home Wiki or large Wikipedias (such as the English Wikipedia, which already has Check-User). Nonetheless, they have the ability to do that. The question is that "Is there a meaningful probability that Martetanha (or someone on behalf of him) misuses this ability?" I think there is such a probable possibilty (partly because he lives in Iran, and partly because in all major disputed in FaWiki, and in all elections, including this one, he has been supported by pro-IRI users of FaWiki, while many independent or even nonpolitical users of FaWiki have voiced their concern about him). Of course in theory, if he (or someone on behalf of him) misuses his steward access, his access will be removed. However the delay between starting the abuse and detecting it and removing his steward access can endanger real lives of many Iranian users of all Wikipedias, including English Wikipedia and Persian Wikipedia and Kurdish Wikipedia (even if that delay is less that one hour). Alefbe 20:27, 4 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
Please also see this. Alefbe 11:49, 5 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
I do not see that there is a meaningful probability that Mardetanha will use any tools on any of those projects. He has always committed to not using checkuser on all of the main projects you are concerned about. User:Mardetanha/recusal is a commitment. He will be instantly desysoped if he crosses the line that he has drawn; if he gives himself CU on those projects, questions will be immediately asked on the stewards IRC channel where everyone is notified of all changes of rights. You may visit #wikimedia-stewardsconnect to see these notices, and see who is watching those notices appear in real time. There is no escape from watchful eyes.
Rather than oppose, I think you should be carefully reviewing his recusal statement to see if that contract is acceptable to concerned users. It will be the duty of the rest of the community, especially the other stewards, to enforce his recusal statement. John Vandenberg 00:59, 6 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

You have spoken edit

Now, can You please be so kind and let others speak too, as I already said to You everyone has only one voice and every person should have enough respect and decency to grant everyone the same right, please can You therefore not comment every other vote, even if they say that they disagree with You, thanks, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 20:03, 5 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

OK. Although I didn't comment on any vote (I just commented about allegations against me or claims on discrediting my argument), I won't comment on the Yes section at all, no matter what are the statements or the allegations. Alefbe 20:07, 5 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
Thank You, well, there are allegations in every section, for each candidate, and it is not possible to comment all these, because they are all personal opinions/impressions of individuals, if an allegation would be addressed to the candidate, IMHO it would be in order for the candidate to address it or ask to address it in the questions-section, but others should mostly not do that, thanks, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 20:13, 5 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Concerns about the 2009 Steward Election edit

From my email to User:Pathoschild:

When I looked at recent votes in favor of Mardetanha (after 15:00, 4 February), I realized that most of them are either connected to Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia community or the Polish community. Also, many of them don't have any connection to the projects where Mardetanha has been active in them. I think this shows widespread canvassing in favor of Mardetanha in those two communities.

From the comment by Ivan Štambuk and related evidences, it's apparent that Millosh has been pushing Serbo-Croacian users to vote for Mardetanha:Štambuk

Also, from comment by Vuvar, it seems that a crat in Polish Wikipedia (who is already steward) is canvassing in favor of Mardetanha in Polish Wikipedia:

It seems that this canvassing has been started earlier, but it has become apparent specially after February 4 (maybe it has become more severe after that, or maybe it's just because in the absence of the fist voting rush, it's much easier to rcognize the pattern of the votes).

I should also mention that considering the vote of 3 of supporters of Mardetanha (who didn't have any contact with any project related to SpeedyGonsales) to SpeedyGonsales, on February 4, a deal between them is apparent (those 3 are Natanaeel83, Komeil 4life and Amir "User:Ladsgroup"). Those 3 haven't voted for anyone other than Mardetanha and SpeedyGonsales. However most of Sebo-Croatian votes in favor of Mardetanha (like Stambuk) are apparently independent of that deal, and according to their statement, are related to canvassing by Millosh.

A. B. Alefbe 11:03, 6 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Dear Alefbe, the part from my talkpage from which you concluded that I've been "canvassed" by Miloš refers in fact to his comment on your comment on the voting page where he explicates his prior involvement in the Persian WP. I voted for very early, before the discussion regarding your points unfolded, and changed back to for after seeing your supporters mentioning death sentences, homophobia, anti-Semitism and whatnot, all in order to generate more controversy. I have never talked, exchanged e-mail or chatted with Miloš in my life, so please don't point your finger at me as some kind of crown evidence, because even if there was canvassing (and judging from the evidence you presented above, I must agree that these SG/M exclusively mutually supportive votes (note that I voted against SG) indeed look suspicious), but once again, I have nothing to do with it. Funny thing that I read this here now, as about an hour ago I received another e-mail asking me to "reconsider" my vote pro M, this time the threat being not the Iranian government, but the apparently some nationalist clowns over the Internet who would hunt down anti-Iranian users had M leaked confidential information to them. What a circus! --Ivan Štambuk 16:54, 6 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
Dear Ivan, I had already mentioned that apparently you are not part of a deal between SG and M (I had already noticed that you have voted against SG). But from the voting pattern, it is apparent that someone has canvassed in favour of Mardetanha among the Serbo-Croatian Wikipedians. My question is this: Do you know Mardetanha or have enough information about Mardetanha's Performance in Wikipedia (to vote based on your assessment)? or you had completely relied on Milosh's recommendation to vote for him (no matter if that recommendation is in the form of email or comments in MetaWiki or local projects)? Alefbe 17:09, 6 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
Also, I should say that about the email that you have received from another user, I have no control over it, and I do not necessarily agree what you have received. Also, I don't suggest you to change your vote (I suggested once on Feb. 1 and I don't suggest anymore). Alefbe 17:15, 6 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
"canvassing has been started earlier, but it has become apparent specially after February 4" and "it seems that a crat in Polish Wikipedia (who is already steward) is canvassing in favor of Mardetanha in Polish Wikipedia" - false, false, false. But of course You have got a right to make mistakes :). I think you cant see the problem - people (IMO) are just annoyed with this what you do on Mardetanha's election page and on their talk pages (what is that for expl?). And - I have to admit i change my vote after a discusion with Mardetanha and when i read what the steward from pl:wiki said in his vote cos I TRUST him, and he knows meta and Mardetanha MUCH better than me. Your insinuation bout him is unfair and false - not everyone knows meta enough to vote so a lot of people puts their trust in the leaders of their community. After i deleted my "no" vote i looked again at your arguments and I found it very weak and I voted for Mardetanha. Now You convinced me it was a good choice. I'm not going to talk about it with You anymore - so please dont use my talk page or e-mail any more - i realy have got more important things to do than talk bout this election. Regards! Have a good life and be happy! Vuvar1 04:17, 7 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
A Comment: My recent comment on Vuvar's talkpage was just asking about the name of that Polish 'crat and my email to him was just a reminder to him to check his talk page and answer that question there (there wasn't anything else in my email). He answered my question by email. Alefbe 04:51, 7 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
Second comment. About Vuvar's statement that "I think you cant see the problem - people (IMO) are just annoyed with this what you do on Mardetanha's election page and on their talk pages", though I don't deny its possibility, I'm puzzled why more than half of those people who are annoyed by me are either from Polish Wikipedia or Serbo-Croatian Wikipedias. Alefbe 05:06, 7 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
One more thing. I dont want to talk about the election only cos i'm busy (for another 2-3 weeks) in my real life (exams) and i dont have enough time even for pl:wiki. It's nothing personal- I just realised that it can be easily misunderstood. Sorry- I didnt mean to be rude. Regards! Vuvar1 06:44, 7 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Please Don't edit

You sent me an e-mail to encourage me to vote against Mardetanha in Steward Election 2009. (and as I learnt you sent that e-mail to some other users.) Please don't use wikipedia tools for revenge and resolving your personal problem. --Rooh23 05:48, 10 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

That email was sent on Feb 1 and I have already explained about those emails (that issue is already discussed in my talk page). So, don't pretend that it's a new email. Also, don't try to diverge the attention from the issue of canvassing by Mardetanha's friends (including user:Millosh and user:Wpedzich who are steward) in SerboCroatian Wikipedias and Polish Wikipedia, in recent days. Alefbe 06:00, 10 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
Yes, I confirm that I got your e-mail before my voting. I wanted you to not repeat that. (in this and other cases) --Rooh23 07:01, 10 February 2009 (UTC)Reply