Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits are considered vandalism, and if you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the hard work of others. Thanks. --Tawker07:13, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You have been temporarily blocked from editing for vandalism of Wikipedia. If you wish to make useful contributions, you may do so after the block expires. Shanel07:21, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please explain what obscene image I have added to Wikipedia. Most probably you got confused with who the author was. Recently I labeled an image as obscene and recommended it for deletion. So see whom are you clicking. -Ambuj Saxena (talk) 10:18, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It is important to keep a cool head, especially when responding to comments against you or your edits. Personal attacks and disruptive comments only escalate a situation; please keep calm and remember that action can be taken against other parties if necessary. Attacking another user back can only satisfy trolls or anger contributors and leads to general bad feeling. Please try to remain civil with your comments. Thanks! Computerjoe18:02, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You and IP User:202.177.246.3 are the same. Edits to your userpage indicate thus clearly [3] I do not respond to threats, especially in email...you are more than welcome to take your case to any admin that is willing to listen to you. Wikipedia does not permit the kind of "trolling" and biased edits as witnessed in the following...especially after you made such heineous edits that resulted in a one month block. Only days after I am kind enough to unblock you, you return to your pattern.
Americans being roasted to death even as they leap toward certain death-Kodak Moments
I particularly enjoyed watching this Yank who was on fire clutching this dead American kid and jumping off the 32nd floor!Oh yeah and this one pic of an Yank head-yes just a head rolling around on the street-SWEET!!!!!!!
Edits after I unblocked you and prior to your current one week block include:
As far as I am concerned, your edits are highly insulting and no one has to tolerate them. You will wait out your one week block and if you return to this useless editing, the block will become a permanent ban. Don't bother emailing me again on this matter.--MONGO09:54, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Prasi90, thanks for your concern in classifying me appropriately on the Wiki community, and thus changing my user box from Indian to NRI. However, if you would look carefully, you will noticed that {{User IND Wiki}} desginates me as Indian Wikipedian and not necessarly Indian resident wikipedian. {{User NRI}} still designates me as Indian, but adds further information on my status as NRI. Unless I renounce my Indian citizenship - which I have not done so yet - or unless {{User IND Wiki}} is modified to mean only Indian resident user, I am still correct in using this. Good luck for more productive editing. AshishG (talk·contribs)
It is important to keep a cool head, especially when responding to comments against you or your edits. Personal attacks and disruptive comments only escalate a situation; please keep calm and remember that action can be taken against other parties if necessary. Attacking another user back can only satisfy trolls or anger contributors and leads to general bad feeling. Please try to remain civil with your comments. Thanks! Any other questions, see my talk page. --Chachu207 ::: Talk to me19:34, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please also read WP:NPOV, by the way. You also need to assert her notability (awards won? Successful films (box office ratings?)) etc. NSLE(T+C) at 08:56 UTC (2006-03-14)
I've cleaned it up a little, although it still needs a source or two, prerably English. NSLE(T+C) at 09:19 UTC (2006-03-14)
Want to be blocked again for disruption? I reverted your userpage as you are once again attacking me...[5]. I also see that your voting pattern in Rfa's is solely for disruption:[6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11]. I can see that you're a bad faith editor with no concern for others feelings and that you serve no purpose other than to disrupt the community. Be a good scout and grow up now. This is not a playground.--MONGO17:26, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent rfa voting behavior, while not against policy, is a little bit naughty. I'm afraid you omit to recall that you are a user whose behavior was identified as problematic in various cases.
I do not believe in trolling, and I think it a tad unfair to vent your anger on other wikipedians in spite of your own actions and disposition.
I also looked at your block log [12], noticing as I did so that that your recent votes on rfa were common place. In the subsequent post I constructed in the nominee's defense, it also came to my attention that you are constructing malicious edits that disparage various articles as well as making unneeded personal attacks.
That will not be tolerated.
I have also found you to have engaged in "hounding" others, and so disrupting Wikipedia and discouraging their positive contributions. I kindly inquire you to stop. You need to work on a few other things. I'm sorry if this seems a little harsh, but you are (not yet) in an posistion to jugde other people's merit.-ZeroTalk17:29, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Prasi90, in light of your repeated personal attacks and vandalism on Wikipedia, a request has been made for the Wikipedia community to reach a consensus on whether action should be taken against you. Please visit Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Prasi90 and summarise your actions and your views on the reported policy violations. Thanks. haz(user talk)e20:19, 14 March 2006
You have been blocked 24 hours for harassing users who endorsed the RFC against you. NSLE(T+C) at 07:36 UTC (2006-03-15)
Thank you for commenting on my RFA. I appreciated the comments and will endeavor to improve with my new sysop status. If there's ever anything I can do to help, please don't hesitate to contact me. --Myles Long15:07, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your participation in my recent RfA, which I am pleased to say passed with a final tally of 80/1/1. If you ever need any help, or if I mess something up as an admin, please let me know.
I just got a 'newbie' error : "Please stop adding nonsense to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you." for fixing a punctuation error on a quote page.
I may indeed be a newbie, but changing
"Bite my red hot glowing ass!Wait"
to
"Bite my red hot glowing ass! Wait"
I'm sorry, we have removed you from the membership list. Your recent behavior, as discussed in the RFC about you, is not the kind of behavior that we are looking for in our members. If you want to join in the future, please ask the admin general or any of the Advisory Council members. Thanks! --JoanneB16:16, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Why are you going around issuing warnings [13] to other editors about vandalism, when you're not even reverting any vandalisms? In light of your edit history, I do not think you are in a position to be issuing warnings to others at this time. Do you have anything constructive to add to Wikipedia? I am inclined to think that you do not.--MONGO16:25, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Prasi90! I have left a suggestion here [14] and it is my hope that you take it into your consideration, and I further urge you to detach yourself from any discussion you are having with other editors/administrators, and take a much less passionate stance than you have recently embarked upon. Such an attitude can't hurt you, and could go far to help. Regards, Hamster Sandwich17:18, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Are you going to write an encyclopedia or do you want me to enforce a block on you for disruption. I'm about done with your uselessness. Oh, and no question mark.--MONGO05:36, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
An administrator named MONGO has blocked me for a week citing "disruption" as a reason.He has added no further proof as to which edits of mine were disruptive in nature.I think he is harassing me for pointing out glaring grammatical errors he had made.Please unblock me at the earliest or state which edits were disruptive in nature.Although my username does not appear on the block list,I am unable to edit pages.I see a message which tells me I have been blocked by MONGO.This too seems highly unusual.My IP 202.177.246.3 was blocked.MONGO infact traced this IP and now probably knows where I live-he mentioned my address on his user talk page.I fear for my personal safety.Will somebody please help me?Also NSLE while I thank you for your efforts in trying to get me unblocked,why can't I add {{unblock}}?Maybe if I add that template other ,fair, admins like you will look into this matter?I have added an unblock template for the time being since NSLE has logged off-according to a message posted by him on MONGO's talk page.
It might be noted here that I have created the following articles (as can be verified from my contributions page)-Manu Bhandari,Maharashtra Navnirman Sena,Bird Flu In India and Zee Cafe.Also see Special:Contribs/Prasi90. User:Prasi90 09:53, 21 March 2006 (UTC
I cannot see your username in the block list. NSLE(T+C) at 07:20 UTC (2006-03-21)
Could you please stop adding {{unblock}}? I'll need the reason stated you're blocked (directly form the page). And is it an IP that's blocked? NSLE(T+C) at 07:26 UTC (2006-03-21)
I said stop adding {{unblock}}, that in itself is disruptive. I'll talk to MONGO. NSLE(T+C) at 07:38 UTC (2006-03-21)
Adding unblock disrupts the unblock bot as well as admins trying to solve other cases. Sicne you've already got an admin working on your unblock, it really isn't needed. I'm still waiing on a reply for MONGO, so I need you to be co-operative until I can get a reply, as he's offline. NSLE(T+C) at 08:03 UTC (2006-03-21)
The Rfc about this editor clearly demostrates virtually an endless stream of insults, trolling behavior: random oppose votes on Rfa's for no reason except to be disruptive, pedantic questioning about trivialities just to be obtuse, vandalism warnings to other editors without even doing any actual vandalism reverts (when he/she has done their fair share of vandalism and is hardly in an position to be warning others). This editor has contributed nothing of worth to this project and in light of the incessant trolling and harassment of several editors, the one week block is quite lenient.--MONGO09:48, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please provide examples of disruptive edits (if I have infact made any such edits).It is my right to know for what edit I am being blocked.)PS-NSLE,you stated on MONGO's talk page that you were logging off.So for the time being I have added an unblock template here.After you log on again please remove the template.User:Prasi9010:04, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You were asked to remove the unblock template and yet you continue to put it back. Do you want a month long block...I'll be glad to give you one. How many examples of disruption do I need to give you...the evidence is all over your talk page, in your edit summaries, in your edits themselves, not to mention harassing emails to me and other editors.--MONGO10:13, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Are you threatening me not to argue against your block?When NSLE asked you to unblock me,you refused.Please note that once my block expires,I will contact the Arbitration Committee about your repeated threats and your unwillingness to listen to other admins advice regarding my block.I will also tell the ArbCom about how you refused to give me specific examples {as in links} of my disruptive edits.Do not take this as a threat.I am only reminding you that you cannot use your sysop powers to harass me.As I mentioned I am only adding the unblock template because you refused to follow his advice and unblock me.If you block me for a month citing the unblock template as a reason,I assure you that I will inform the Committee of the reason why I kept adding the said template.Also you have said Want a month long block?I'll be glad to give you one..This language seems threatening and disdainful.I do not know why you insist on blocking me repeatedly even though I make several constructive edits.You even persecute me for voting on RfAs.What do I make of this?I am beginning to believe (although I may be wrong) that you are biased against me.Please look into the matter.User:Prasi9010:22, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Accusations of racism is severe. Please retract your statement, Prasi90, otherwise even while you may get unblocked for disruption you'd get hit on civility. NSLE(T+C) at 10:38 UTC (2006-03-21)
Addendum: I've received harassing emails from you in the past before, too, but I'm trying to help you, Prasi90, so part of the argument you make is baseless. NSLE(T+C) at 10:40 UTC (2006-03-21)
I have retracted the racism statement NSLE,as also the email part.If I have offended you in any of my emails,I am sorry NSLE,I only did it out of frustration at having an RfC put up against me despite my constructive edits.I sincerely hope you will forgive me for any inappropriate actions of mine,since I hold you in high regard not just as an Administrator and an editor but also as a person.User:Prasi9010:55, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Latest threatening email from Prasi...
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 09:07:20 GMT
To: "MONGO" <mongomontana@yahoo.com>
Subject: Please read this.
From: "Prasi90" <prasad59@gmail.com> Add to Address Book Add Mobile Alert
Your messages on my talk page have been far from official.If you would
like to communicate with me please do so in formal English.You warnings
do not count if they leave room for ambiguity.If you want me to stop
issuing vandalism warnings,then ask me to do so in an official message on
my talk page.This is not the American Midwest and I am not a
Hillbilly.So kindly refrain from asking me to "grow up".Also,I do not care for
your inclinations-as is clear from the way I insult you and your
countrymen.So do not bother informing me about whether or not you think I would
make a good Wikipedian.Confine your Americanisms to conversations
between you and your "pardners".Thank you.
and another:
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 03:38:20 GMT
To: "MONGO" <mongomontana@yahoo.com>
Subject: Wikipedia e-mail
From: "Prasi90" <prasad59@gmail.com> Add to Address Book Add Mobile Alert
I have just one thing to ask you-aren't you ashamed?I am 16 years of
age.And yet you seem to have this personal vendetta against me.Why don't
you pick on someone of your own age instead of bullying a kid?Just let
me get on with my editing and mind your own business.Its an insult to
you if you let someone as young as me outwit you.I mean you must be
atleast 50.
and another threat
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 07:19:28 GMT
To: "MONGO" <mongomontana@yahoo.com>
Subject: Blocking without reason.
From: "Prasi90" <prasad59@gmail.com> Add to Address Book Add Mobile Alert
You have blocked me for a week for "disruption" without mentioning
which edits of mine were disruptive in nature.This is a clear misuse of
sysop privileges on your part.If you do not explicitly which edits were
disruptive,you will be violating Wikipedia policy.Once my editing powers
have been restored to me,I assure you I will take this matter up with
the ArbCom.
I fully justify these emails.The language you use while conversing with me is highly informal-almost degrading at times.As for picking on me-yes,you are targetting me.You have kept me blocked despite NSLE's requests to unblock me.User:Prasi9011:10, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Prasi, my suggestion is, cool off for a while. Go have a nice dinner, play some football or cricket, hang out with mates while we sort this out. I guarantee to have this sorted within 24 hours, you have my word. NSLE(T+C) at 11:13 UTC (2006-03-21)
He didn't request I unblock you...just that he thought the block was too long. If the other admin hadn't gone soft, you'd still be in the midst of a month long block, which I will implement if you send one more harassing email to me again. NOT ONCE have I insulted your country or countrymen on Wikipedia or in email. I am not a hick or hillbilly. Once your editing powers are restored I really do hope you take this up with arbcom.--MONGO11:16, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That would be correct, I never explicitly requested your unblocking. Having discussed it, I am unblocking on the condition that you send this to WP:RFAR. NSLE(T+C) at 11:21 UTC (2006-03-21)
It was conditional unblock, so send the matter to RFAR please. This is not for discussion. NSLE(T+C) at 11:41 UTC (2006-03-21)
To Mr.MONGO and other concerned administrators-
Please keep this pgae unblocked for the time being as I plan to post an RFAR here,which Fred Brauer has said he will transfer to RFAR.As I have certain other engagements at this point of time I will not be able to post RFAR right now.However I will do so as soon as possible [most likely within around 24 hrs. after this time].Thank you.User:Prasi9005:56, 4 April 2006 (UTC)(11:30 A.M IST)[reply]
The following is an (incomplete) request for Arbitration in the case of MONGO vs. Prasi90.Since I do not have the time to finish posting all the diffs. etc. in one go please wait till I have finished the RfAr before transferring it to the RfAr page.Also please excuse any deviations from the recommended request format.
I am at present a permanently blocked user.I was blocked in this manner by the user MONGO.As a matter of fact MONGO and I have had issues in the past and I have been blocked several times in the past by the said Administrator.I agree that in the past I have made certain vandalism-like edits.But I have already apologized for the same (I have infact already been blocked for the vandalism)and have since turned over a new leaf and have become a constructive editor.MONGO accuses me of being a bigot since I proclaim myself to be Anti-American.However I have apologized to MONGO many times and have told him of my intention to change.Despite this the latter continues to block me.Please give me a chance to be a good editor and do not let me be condemned forever for my past actions.
User who feels that MONGO has in the past been uncivil
User:Happysplashy
Please help, I am very surprised at the rude tone in an administrators talk page and other places he/she writes. I believe an administrator should be polite, always. The link is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:MONGO
Please have someone explain to this administrator the importance of courtesy. He/she appears rude and/or on a "power trip."
Thank you very much, Happy Splashy Happysplashy 19:05, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
Statements made by MONGO to Prasi90 which seem to be uncivil/rude/unprofessional in nature when compared to the tone in which Prasi90 communicates with MONGO.These statements show that Mr.MONGO uses his blocking powers to harass Prasi90-especially with permanent and month-long blocks.These may also be posted on Requests for De-administratorship
Do you have anything constructive to add to Wikipedia? I am inclined to think that you do not.--MONGO 16:25, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
Are you going to write an encyclopedia or do you want me to enforce a block on you for disruption. I'm about done with your uselessness. Oh, and no question mark.--MONGO 05:36, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
The above comment seems to be particularly aggressive.
This editor has contributed nothing of worth to this project and in light of the incessant trolling and harassment of several editors, the one week block is quite lenient.--MONGO 09:48, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
The phrase which has been highlighted by me again seems to be judgemental and uncivil.
Once again, all the information regarding your situation has been posted at AN/I and you can see what has transpired here [15]. Please do not email me on this matter anymore. Once your block lifts or if another admin lifts your blocks, then you can arbitrate all you wish, but I do not want to get anymore threatening emails from you.--MONGO07:55, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
About the Arbitration issue-please read this email sent to me by Fred Bauder-
Fred Bauder <fredbaud@ctelco.net> to me, Arbitration
More options 10:24 am (4 hours ago)
Ok, I have unprotected your user pages; put any request for
arbitration there and I'll transfer it.
You see I was only putting up an RFAr so that Mr.Bauder could transfer the same to RFAr.I'm not sure yet of when he will put it up but it will probably take some more time.So please let me continue to edit my usertalk page.I also have a query-Although I have full faith in your impartiality,MONGO,I feel that I would like some other Administrator to look into the issue of the block you have put on me.In order to bring the situation to the notice of some other Administrator,I would like to put up an unblock template on my Userpage.Before doing so I want to ask you for your permission.Is it O.K for me to put the said template on my userpage?Also I am sorry if my e-mails caused you any inconvenience.User:Prasi9009:11, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No, you cannot, because I've already reviewed the block and thought it to be fair (misuse of {{unblock}} is not a smart idea...), and you remain blocked for a reason (otherwise I'm sure Fred B. would have unblocked you, which he didn't, and not simply offered to post the case to AC - which you can't do while blocked). NSLE(T+C) at 09:14 UTC (2006-04-04)
As you can see,sir I am continuing to write up an RfAr which,when finished,may be posted by Fred at RfAr.Also,as you can see,I have made a list of seemingly uncivil remarks you have made against me.There is also evidence to show that you have used the blocking powers granted to you to threaten me repeatedly with long (sometimes permanent) blocks.These threats may even be considered harassment,or misuse of Administrative privileges.These may be sufficient grounds for me to request Fred to post a RFDA-Request for De-Administratorship ( on my behalf) against you.Before I go ahead with my plan of action I ask you once more-is there a possibility of us resolving this dispute between ourselves without taking it up with RfAr and RFDA.I am willing to refrain from taking the issue to RFDA,if you unblock me.I,will ofcourse on my part,stop giving you any cause to take action against me.I will also put the issue of uncivil,aggressive comments made by you aside.Please reply at the earliest.?Can a compromise of some sort be reached between us?Thank You.User:Prasi9010:41, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Prasi90...I am not going to unblock you. As Fred Bauder explained, you can continue to post your evidence and when you are completed, he will transclude it to the correct page. There are clerks that can cleanup the evidence links, so all you have to do is ensure you provide all the evidence you need to help you with your case.--MONGO11:17, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The following is a (not yet complete)request for de-administratorship/disciplinary action against the user MONGO.I ask Fred to please post this on my behalf alongwith the RfAr.
Statements made by MONGO to Prasi90 which seem to be uncivil/rude/unprofessional in nature when compared to the tone in which Prasi90 communicates with MONGO.These statements show that Mr.MONGO uses his blocking powers to harass Prasi90-especially with permanent and month-long blocks.
Urges Prasi90 to "grow up" and "be a good scout" since "this (Wikipedia) is not a playground".Also asks Prasi90 "Want to be blocked again for disruption?" in what seems to be a threatening manner.[16]
Do you have anything constructive to add to Wikipedia? I am inclined to think that you do not.--MONGO 16:25, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
Are you going to write an encyclopedia or do you want me to enforce a block on you for disruption. I'm about done with your uselessness. Oh, and no question mark.--MONGO 05:36, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
The above comment seems to be particularly aggressive.
Here,in line 173 MONGO says-"Do you want a month long block...I'll be glad to give you one",seems again to be an aggressive statement
This editor has contributed nothing of worth to this project and in light of the incessant trolling and harassment of several editors, the one week block is quite lenient.--MONGO 09:48, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
The phrase which has been highlighted by me again seems to be judgemental and uncivil.
User who feels that MONGO has in the past been uncivil
User:Happysplashy Please help, I am very surprised at the rude tone in an administrators talk page and other places he/she writes. I believe an administrator should be polite, always. The link is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:MONGO
Please have someone explain to this administrator the importance of courtesy. He/she appears rude and/or on a "power trip."
Thank you very much, Happy Splashy Happysplashy 19:05, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
An example of a message FROM Prasi90 TO MONGO.Please note the polite,professional language used by me.This example can be compared with one of the above comments by MONGO to observe the difference in civility[17]
MONGO's Response
So now we're worrying about nonsense that was posted to my userpage by me 15 months ago? I did this as a joke...and less than a week later demostrated this with the following comment that I was being preposterous.--MONGO 13:00, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
A few excerpts from the "joke"
I was wondering if such edits (which would otherwise probably be considered as bigotry)can be excused if used in a "joke"?
MONGO is a white male that was proudly born and raised in the U.S.A. He laughs at those that think of President George Bush as an ultra conservative. He considers all liberals to be adolescent, ridiculous and wrong. He would never vote for a Democrat and hopes that Democrats continue to be ignorant of mainstream American politics enough that they nominate a leftist again in 2008.
MONGO is a big fan of true history without the revisionist bend. In other words, he doesn't like it when say George Washington is not portrayed in the historical context of his era and instead judged by modern moral values. Revisionist historians are usually people that have no ancestral roots which ever created any American history.
MONGO knows that gays and lesbians always state their sexual orientation when they themselves question their orientation. Those that are comfortable with this illness rarely speak of it.
MONGO is a big fan of the war on terror and thinks it is long overdue. MONGO feels that more bombs should be used on more countries that pose a threat to our civilization. Though vehemently opposed to placing our boys in harm's way, he has no objection to placing bombs there.
In this edit posted by MONGO on my IP usertalk page MONGO seems to resent the fact that I might post anti-American nonsense on a blog.It might appear that my political viewpoint was a reason why MONGO blocked me
this is just one simple website...what about those blogs you talked about, you know the ones you wanted ti fill up with all that anti-American nonsense...maybe you should concentrate on those for the time being. See you in a few weeks.--MONGO 11:19, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
This was posted by MONGO on a vote page for Bush Crimes Commission-MONGO's language (once again) seems to be condescending.
Delete So a few Bush haters and terminated employees got together and complained...no surprise.--MONGO 03:34, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
Prasi90, you continue to judge my comments which are not insulting to any other editors....I am going to insist that your block be permanent and that includes your IP. I can see no good faith in your intentions to edit Wikipedia, and I can see that your anti-American bias is not going to make you a constructive contributor to this enterprise. I have contact HampsterSandwich and informed him of my final decision on the matter.--MONGO15:09, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't waste your energy on this. We are not hesitant to desysop administrators in appropriate cases. If that is an appropriate remedy we will apply it. Just make a request for arbitration, set forth your major complaints, link to diffs that are good examples of the behavior you object to. (It also helps if you admit and explain or apologize for any bad behavior on your own part.) Fred Bauder14:56, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
These comments were posted by MONGO on his userpage on 18th Januray 2005
MONGO is a white male that was proudly born and raised in the U.S.A. He laughs at those that think of President George Bush as an ultra conservative. He considers all liberals to be adolescent, ridiculous and wrong. He would never vote for a Democrat and hopes that Democrats continue to be ignorant of mainstream American politics enough that they nominate a leftist again in 2008.
MONGO is a big fan of true history without the revisionist bend. In other words, he doesn't like it when say George Washington is not portrayed in the historical context of his era and instead judged by modern moral values. Revisionist historians are usually people that have no ancestral roots which ever created any American history.
MONGO knows that gays and lesbians always state their sexual orientation when they themselves question their orientation. Those that are comfortable with this illness rarely speak of it.
MONGO is a big fan of the war on terror and thinks it is long overdue. MONGO feels that more bombs should be used on more countries that pose a threat to our civilization. Though vehemently opposed to placing our boys in harm's way, he has no objection to placing bombs there.
MONGO likes candy.
MONGO is both undestanding and open minded and enjoys his freedom of speech and entices all liberals to contemplate how they might feel if they did not have this freedom the way they do in places such as Iraq, Iran, Burma, North Korea, and 1980's Argentina. The price of freedom is never cheap...without democracy in Iraq and places like it, our sons and grandsons will face ultimate ruin...the time to act is now and talk doesn't always work.
Prasi90, I strongly encourage you to focus on other aspects of your case, rather than these nonsensical diffs placed on a userpage. These have nothing to do with the strengthing of your rfar case and will make your edvidence document appear very silly. I suggest you stop playing with silly semantics and take this seriously. -ZeroTalk13:20, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
MONGO I have a question-you say that what you wrote was a joke and by saying it was proposterous you made it so.So,going by the same logic,if I were to state that all the vandalisms I did were also jokes and backed that statement up by saying it was "preposterous" would I be off the hook just like you?Kindly clarify if I am right or if I have made a mistake in analyzing the situation.If the latter is true please be so kind as to spare the time to tell me how my case is different from yours.Thank You.User:Prasi9014:02, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Don't play us for fools. Vandalism, personal attacks, trolling and harressment is no where near the realm of being a jest like MONGO's edits. They are nothing alike because your actions henceforth disrupted the encyclopedia and its community, which MONGO's edits did not. A clear point of this is that MONGO was not blocked for his actions, and you have proceeded to gain multiple offenses. These situations are differing in quality and in sourced views. You sent immflammatory e-mails, fiddled with articles, gained blocks from multiple administrators and utilized a sockpuppet to circumvent these blocks.
That is not acceptable.
All the aftermentioned violations are clearly against so many policies and result in banable disruption clauses. Stop this silliness, lest your rfar case be rejected. -ZeroTalk14:12, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sockpuppets to circumvent blocks?I have already explained in detail in the user talk page of my IP 202.177.246.3 that I did no such thing.Please do not make false accusation even if they are made unintentionally.User:Prasi9015:07, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Despite Kelly's belief that that account has no association with you, I find the facts pertaining to its creation and its abrubt and coensidental involvement in this issue very difficult to swallow. If not a sockpuppet, it must surely be a person that has contant with you in the real world to intervene in such a descriminate fashion, posting extremely acrurate observations and claims on the help board. His statement of I'm 34 is also extemely difficult to believe, given his almost direct mimicrcy of your writing and communication style.
And lest we forget his timeframe of creation..? It was created almost immediately proceeding your block and migrated almost immediately and suddenly to MONGO's talkpage in your defense. I could possibly be mistaken, but the amount of facts surrounding this account is unmistakeable, and the datum of the account ceasing without delay only furthly fortifies the fact that a conclusion leads to some association or another. -ZeroTalk15:24, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If you can accuse me sockpuppetry,Megaman Zero,I can also do the same to you.I may also be mistaken but it seems that you and MONGO have a close association?User:Prasi9018:35, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You certainly could. I realize, however you lack absolutely any factual observations or supporting facts for such a claim. -ZeroTalk23:33, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Prasi90, I had suggested to Mongo on his talk page in the past week that I would like to have offered you a type of mentorship, in hopes that by some gentle, but firm guidance some of the current conflict you have recently been engaged in could have been avoided. Unfortunately, at the present time I have limited access to a computer terminal, and I have final exams coming up in the next few weeks, so I must withdraw from the course I had suggested. I do not know how you would feel about establishing such an arrangement in the future, but I would appreciate any feedback you have to add to this suggestion. MONGO and NSLE seemed amienable to the idea of a mentorship extended to you as being a positive step. I see that you are about to engage in the Arbitration process. Depending on the way that "shakes out", if you are indeed amienable to the idea of a mentorship in the future, I would be pleased to extend my services to you in that respect, after my exams are completed as time allows, and with certain stipulations that we can discuss on the terms of said mentorship. Regards, Hamster Sandwich16:13, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Fred,you have advised me to stop trying to have action taken against MONGO.I,on my part,am fully willing to forgive and forget any uncivil remarks made by MONGO to me.However,MONGO,as i have already stated made edits to his userpage-[19] (in the past) wherein he supports the dropping of bombs on certain countries.MONGO also states that he supports the war on terror.Later he said that he made these comments as a "joke".MONGO feels that more bombs should be used on more countries that pose a threat to our civilization.Now I,for one,feel that these views are MONGO's personal feelings and ideals.Even if that is not so,I ask you-is it fair on his part to joke about something as serious and tragic as the conflict in Iraq?If MONGO were to relate this "joke" to an Iraqi child orphaned as a result of the aforementioned bombings,would the child be amused?This "joke" is,I feel,in very bad taste.I (unfortunately),after my interactions with Americans on Wikipedia and other places on the internet have come to believe that many Americans are insensitive to the suffering of those affected by US military presence in places like Iraq and Afghanistan (where the "war on terror" is being fought).HOWEVER,I do believe that there are Americans who are sympathetic to the (non-American) victims of the said war.Having said this,I ask Mr.Bauder and others who read this message to please take some sort of action against MONGO for this "joke".If you do not believe this "joke" to be in bad taste I suggest that you post it on the Arabic version of Wikipedia (since members of this Wikipedia version are likely to be Muslims-the community which has been most affected by this conflict)and see the reaction which you get.Let us see if the Arabic users are amused by MONGO's joke about bombing other nations.I think that this sort of conduct is not the sort expected of an Adminstrator.Administrators are supposed to be guides to other editors.Please take some sort of action against this "joke" so that the confidence that non-American Wikipedians have in the fairness of the Wikipedia system may be restored.User:Prasi9017:18, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
PS-Let me take this oppurtunity to apologize for my past behaviour.Infact I have also made a personal apology to MONGO.Also I may not be able to access Wikipedia (much) between 6th April 2006 and 11th April 2006.I request that any messages/queries to me (which require my attention) be posted after the 11th of April 2006.User:Prasi9018:32, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This was on my userpage, not article space, whereby your edits were in article talk pages and in article space. I was elected more than 10 months later to be an admin...my entire edit history was reviewed at that time and I still was elected to this position. Do you have anymore evidence of my being incivil towrds you are others...and I would very much like to see all evidence you have that I have violated the no personal attacks rule. Fred has asked you above to not dwelve into this and instead concentrate on the rationale for my desysopping...this would mean evidence that I have abused my admin tools or abuse my position...especially evidence that you were unjustly blocked or harassed by me. When you are done, let Fred know, he can move the information and I will be given an opportunity to respond.--MONGO19:06, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Fred was not telling you that you have to stop discussing the talk page edit from last summer, he was suggesting that it might be a waste of your time. When you are trying to have someone de-sysoped you will usually want to find (recent) evidence of misuse of administrative powers or egregarious violations of policy. MilesVorkosigan21:16, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:MONGO&oldid=9480246 is rather tame compared to the statement of Tom Tancredo suggesting that we bomb Mecca. People have opinions, ever read Osama's fatwah, "religious duty to kill any Jew, any American?" Better that they are out in the open. However, this relates to the userbox controversy, which revolves around not permitting divisive and provocative proclamations of allegiance. I lost on that front. I thought it better for folks to open express their viewpoints. The consensus is that it is not good for the project. So perhaps Mongo's proclamations fall into that kind of disruptive expression. Fred Bauder20:59, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As for my userpage, I was just doing it to provoke JamesMLane and I was a newbie editor...it was January 2005. In less than week, I stated I was being preposterous[20] and I then put up an accurate depiction of my beliefs. I've long believed that userpages should be neutral, and though I didn't vote much on the policies regarding userboxes, I was opposed to them billboarding userpages with what may be construed as inflammatory or insulting rhetoric. Regardless, I definitely support the war on terror, not that I agree with all the manner in which we are waging it though. Here Prasi90, using his IP 202.177.246.3 refers to Americans as Nazis[21] calls U.S. troops neo-nazis[22] and in article space "perverted,sadistic mentality of American troops and Americans in general"[23], he blanked the article on the United States here to post his commentary[24] vandalized the same article earlier[25] redirects the Category on the United States to Sudan[26] and more vandalism[27],[28]. Prasi90 with his IP login asks how to make a template "anti-American"[29], there is a whole series of edits made from his IP to Prasi90 userpage [30], [31], [32], [33]. With the IP account, he states that the victims of 9/11 are "clearly rotting in hell" in article space[34] and when I first stumbled into him was after he added this lovely comment to my watchlisted article September 11, 2001 attacksAmericans being roasted to death even as they leap toward certain death-Kodak Moments. Ip then insults one editor on his usertalk about his sexual orientation[35]. IP adds information to the Rfc filed against Prasi90 [36]. Using his Prasi90 account, editor again calls Americans neo Nazis[37] tells another editor he has a mental deficiency[38]...oh the list goes on and on. I haven't even touched the rather hard warnings he gave some vandals that they would be blocked and yet didn't do even one vandalism revert that I could find. There is a series of opposition votes on Rfa's that served no purpose aside from disruption. There have been numerous threatening emails to myself and other editors and he has been asked to stop. I asked him why he posted a user:vandal template on his userpage and he lied and told me that he was reflecting that he was a student at the university of Idaho [39] and I ran three IP checks on his IP and they all came back as India. Anyway, a look at the block logs for the IP[40] and for Prasi90[41] demonstrate that this editor has been blocked by numerous admins and has been released from those blocks prior to their expiration after apologizing, only to return to the same disruptive editing pattern. I've listed maybe 30% of the edits that clearly demostrate this editor has disrupted, has vandalized, has harassed and has trolled his way around Wikipedia. If this is accepted by the arbitrators, I will be glad to post all that is needed to demonstrate that I have in fact been extremely civil and fair to this editor.--MONGO01:22, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Mr.MONGO,as you may know HamsterSandwich has made me an offer of mentorship.So until I hear from the said user again I will refrain from taking any action regarding RFAr or RFDAs.
As for you,MONGO,using your Administrative privileges to harass me,your repeated "offers" to have me blocked for a month appear to be aggressive.After reading these messages it seems you use your blocking powers to threaten me in so unprofessional(?) a language that it seems to be harassment.You have infact once stated on my talk page I tolerate no bigotry.....I note here that you,MONGO have said that YOU (not WIKIPEDIA) tolerates no bigotry.This again appears to unusual.
As for calling American troops Nazis-I have seen pictures and read accounts of US soldiers in Iraq using everything from trained attack dogs to electrodes to intimidate Iraqis POWs whilst "interrogating" them.This reminded me of what I had heard about the treatment meted out to Jews by their Nazi captors.In one TV grab a US soldier says this to an Iraqi POW whilst "interoggating" him-"Die you f---ing towelhead".Please note here,the use of the term "towelhead"-a term used by many Americans to describe Arabs i.e People who are not of the Caucasian (white Aryan) race.Now,as we know,the Nazi "Harrenvolk" used to abuse Jews for the "crime" of not being pure Aryan.Hence I made a connection between Nazi SS guards and US troops.Please tell me,MONGO and other American Wikipedians,whether I am correct in my analysis of the situation or whether I am mistaken.
As for calling Americans Nazis-I have interacted with some Americans on the internet who by and large supported the kind of treatment given to Iraqi prisoners by US soldiers.I also read about an American politician-I forgot his name,but I believe he is the American equivalent of a Member of Parliament (Senator,isn't that what they are called),saying that the prisoners "..deserve what they are getting...".Hence I came to the inference that since most of the Americans I have interacted with support the abuse of Iraqi POWS(again,as I said non-Caucasians),perhaps Americans are in some way sympathetic toward Nazi ideology.Please tell me,here also,whether I am correct or mistaken.
I called the American "interrogators" and the Americans who support these "interrogation" methods sadistic because eloctrocuting blindfolded people can hardly be considered normal human behaviour.Please tell me,here also,whether I am correct or mistaken.
As for the 9/11 edit-I apologize if my edit was in bad taste(which it clearly was).However,MONGO, we all have a right to our own viewpoints.Regardless, I definitely support the war on terror-you say this in your previous message to me.You have your own reasons for supporting this "war".I,similarly support the Anti-American views of Mujhahideen groups (again for my own reasons).I must also say here that,frankly,although I regret my insensitive 9/11 edit,I do NOT feel in any way very sympathetic toward those killed in this attack.However,like MONGO's statement,this is merely a factual expression of my personal feelings and I do not intend it as an insult to anybody.Now,I do not want to appear cruel for saying that I do not feel much pity to the victims of 9/11.I did feel sorry for them prior to seeing the pictures of the plight Iraqi men in Abu Ghraib.
Mr.MONGO I request you to,at your leisure, read this message and post your comments on the same.But please stick to the point at hand instead of adding links for my edit-history since you have already done so at the RfC posted against me.
User:Prasi9005:13, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think the point you have missed is that numerous admins have blocked you, not just me. Furthermore, the links I provided are for the arbitrators to evaluate and clearly demostrate that while I made one deliberately preposterous edit to my own userpage, you added these comments to talk and article pages where others edit. This is the point at hand.--MONGO05:32, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
15:30, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
10:04, 21 March 2006 (UTC)