Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Kven

Statement by uninvolved party User:Ghirlandajo[edit]

I'm not sure whether I am a party to this case, as well as the preceding one. Actually, there are some parallels between the two. Last year I was one of the first to encounter the Kven editor, as these diffs illustrate. My first rection was to delete lengthy and obvious original research without further discussion. Such was my strategy when a similar nonsense was pasted in Russo-Turkish War, 1877–1878. Since User:Ideogram thought it appropriate to file an arbitration case against me on this account, I suggest these two cases should be merged. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 11:10, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Response to Ghirlandajo by User:Ideogram[edit]

This statement by Ghirlandajo is utterly bizarre. I cannot see what this case has to do with the one above. I did not file the arbitration case against Ghirlandajo, and the case against Ghirlandajo is not about a particular content dispute but about Ghirlandajo's conduct in general over a period of many months. This statement by Ghirlandajo is simply a waste of time. --Ideogram 11:36, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The material behind the diff links provided by Ghirlandajo are undeniably from the "Kven-user". Otherwise I'd see best these cases handled separately. --Drieakko 11:57, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Response to Ghirlandajo by uninvolved User:Pan Gerwazy[edit]

First I want to apologize to User:Ideogram if this comes over as stalking.

My first thought was also that these were completely unconnected. Now, since in the preceding discussion Fred has brought up the Varangian edit war to claim User:Wiglaf may have left Wikipedia because of User:Ghirlandajo's contributions there - note that that claim was made after User:Ideogram and User:Piotrus withdrew from the Ghirlandajo Request - I feel I must now suggest that, if possible, the part of the accusation against User:Ghirlandajo connected with Varangians be merged with this arbitration case, since it is clear from the discussion there that User:Wiglaf confused Ghirlandajo with the Kven user. Have a good look at User:Adam Bishop's contributions there- they explain it all.

Ghirlandajo is basically right to claim that the anonymous IP Ghirla stalker who since registered as User:Truthseeker 85.5 created the same havoc in Russo-Turkish War, 1877–1878 causing Ghirlandajo to think that ... User:Ideogram was the Ghirla stalker.

As for this particular case, real justice requires equal treatment under equal circumstances. We cannot reward one user (User:Truthseeker 85.5) and give him an account like all un-annoying people here because we cannot block him anyway (without blocking one sixth of Poland that is) and punish the Kven User(s). --Pan Gerwazy 09:48, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked him[edit]

Since nothing happened here, I blocked the user in question after a brief discussion on the village pump, and will continue to ban any sockpuppets of his. / Fred-Chess 13:11, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is there somewhere non-administrators can report his new sockpuppets, like todays User:Random_visitor and User:Ustinov_100?. Also, can we delete posts from accounts that have not yet been confirmed as sockpuppets? Labongo 14:23, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can report at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you suspect it is a sockpuppet, I'd say delete the post.

Fred-Chess 17:18, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New articles[edit]

New articles appeared today: Kväner and Kveanat by Pro vs con (talk · contribs), Kvenek and Kainulainen by Urmund1 (talk · contribs). Cannon fodder? Punkmorten 15:27, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have merged all the above plus Kveenit to Kväner. My apologies if they were not all identical text. -- RHaworth 17:17, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is not the first time the Kven user have attempted to create a parallel fork of the Kven articles for his version. Since everything in his article is already covered by the Kven articles (and discussed multiple times on the talk pages), I don't see any point having this version full of obvious errors. Therefore the articles with the Swedish spelling for Kven should be changed to protected redirects, as has already been done for the Norwegian and Finnish spellings.Labongo 14:11, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I changed all to redirect to Kven. To avoid a revert war the redirects should probably be protected.Labongo 08:26, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Additional forks created 18.11.2006: Historisk Kajanaland, Kvæner, Kveenit, Kainulaiset, Kainu, Cwens, Qvens, Quens, Kvænland, Qvenland, Kwenland, Quenland, Kainuunmaa, Kveeni, Kveenit and Cwenland, now protected and redirected. --Drieakko 08:32, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]