Welcome! (We can't say that loudly enough!)
Here are a few links you might find helpful:
You can sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing ~~~~; our software automatically converts it to your username and the date.
If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on
my talk page. Or, please come to the
New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}}
on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.
We're so glad you're here! — The-thing (Talk) (Stuff I did) 21:24, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
Are those sites on the main Falun Gong page? Jsw663 04:42, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to
talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should
sign your posts by typing four
tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the
Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --
SineBot (
talk)
01:28, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/17/international/asia/17china.html?pagewanted=1 this is the report. I think you ought to read the whole thing. It's quite detailed, and I think that this kind of information may assist you to make more informed decisions about your stance toward certain political entities.-- Asdfg 12345 00:20, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Did you read the article? I would like to hear your thoughts about it. PS: You are right that I should examine my own conduct and attitude. That is very true, and thank you for reminding me. Sometimes I become annoyed with the way you present your arguments. On the other hand, I think it will be fine if you simply add information that can be used for the articles to the talk pages, with a very short, bland note. Please let me know what you think about the Shanwei Massacre.-- Asdfg 12345 16:27, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
By the way, I want to know if you have read that NYT article on the Shanwei massacre. Please tell me if you have or have not read it, and if you have not, please find some time to take a look.-- Asdfg 12345 01:21, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
What about where the police would shoot and injure a villager, then walk to them and shoot them again at close range? Do you have a problem with that?-- Asdfg 12345 19:01, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
May I also ask whether you have lived in mainland China? I would like to understand what you think about these cases like how Hu Jia's lawyer was arrested, and Hu Jia was arrested, and his wife locked in her house, and their laptop, cel. phone confiscated? Do you acknowledge that the CCP is violating the basic human rights of many of its citizens for the purpose of maintaining political power? -- Asdfg 12345 23:18, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
Of course not. It's wrong. Using violence against violence is what people do and have done since always, with few exceptions. I can see how you will be against this, but if you are against violence--ie, the villagers throwing the molotov cocktails--aren't you also against the police shooting the villagers from far away then killing them at close range? And all the other things like torturing dissidents and beating them? Just for speaking against the govt.?-- Asdfg 12345 16:23, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
http://en.epochtimes.com/news/6-3-2/38865.html this might be interesting for you. It's a letter by Gao Zhisheng about Hu Jia's disappearance. What do you think?-- Asdfg 12345 16:29, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Here's another letter, this is from Guo Feixiong's wife: http://en.epochtimes.com/news/8-1-21/64409.html. He isn't guilty of any wrongdoing, but his speaking up for the oppressed is inconvenient for the ruling Party, so they torture him and lock him up. Aren't you disgusted by this?-- Asdfg 12345 21:25, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
But these are open letters, it is just that they have been published in Epoch Times and that's where I saw them. They could have been published anywhere. Epoch Times doesn't have much to do with this. C'mon, that's obvious. I don't know what there is to debate about the reliability of the Epoch Times. I would treat it in the same way as any other primary source for these Falun Gong articles.-- Asdfg 12345 22:48, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm asking you direct and simple questions about your view on basic violations of human rights by the CCP. Why are you avoiding it?-- Asdfg 12345 13:26, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Sure, there's plenty. I will even copy you the text of Guo Feixiong's wife's open letter here, I found this on a non epoch times site: http://www.weijingsheng.org/report/report2008/report2008-01/GuoFXwife080120BushGletterA331-W175.htm:
郭飞雄妻子张青致美国总统布什先生的公开信
注:郭飞雄先生为魏京生基金会2006年第三届“魏京生中国民主斗士奖”得主。请大家关注他的遭遇,并对他及家人提供道义及其它方面的同情与帮助。
尊敬的总统先生:
您好!
我是中国公民张青。我今天给您写这封信是希望您能伸出援手,援救我的丈夫郭飞雄。
郭飞雄曾是二00六年五月您预定要接见的中国民间人权活动人士之一。在二00六年的四月底,郭飞雄应邀到美国参加一个主题为《宗教信仰与法治》的研讨会。在会议结束后的五月十一日,您在白宫接见了从中国前来参加研讨会的三位人士,我丈夫却因非他个人能控制的原因,没有能参加您在白宫举行的与中国民间人权活动人士的会见。虽然他没能参加这次会见,但他非常赞赏您的这一有著特殊意义的举动,他说,这是美国政府对中国民间人权活动的认同和支持。
郭飞雄是中国活跃的人权人士,曾参与多起中国著名的维权事件,例如太石村农民罢免事件,发起并组织营救维权律师高智晟的声援活动等。为此,他屡遭打压,多次入狱。
二00六年九月十四日,郭飞雄又被捕入狱。政府罗织罪名指控他“非法经营”,说他出版了一本揭露中国政坛腐败的杂志《沈阳政坛地震》。早在二00一年,官方就以这个指控罚款郭飞雄十万元。现在,司法当局又搬出这个莫须有的罪名拘捕了郭飞雄。
在广州第一看守所拘留期间,郭飞雄被连续审讯十三个日夜,被强迫不准睡觉;被手脚穿插、全身弯曲地固定铐在木板床上达四十二天;被戴脚镣一百多天。
最残酷的是,二00七年一月二十日,广州司法当局把我丈夫转押到中国东北城市沈阳。沈阳警方把郭飞雄与死刑犯关押在一起,并对他施行了更加惨无人道的酷刑。
二00七年二月十二日,沈阳警方办案人给郭飞雄戴上黑头套,押到秘密地点暴打;反吊我丈夫的双手长时间悬吊在空中;用高压电棒电击他的生殖器。二月十三日,郭飞雄不堪电击生殖器的极度痛苦和羞辱,奋力撞向玻璃,但求一死了之。三月十九日,他们再次用电警棍电击郭飞雄生殖器,达五、六分钟之久。
二00七年十一月十四日,司法当局在没有有效物证的情况下,以用高压电警棍电击生殖器等酷刑逼供得出的口供为证给郭飞雄定罪,判处郭飞雄有期徒刑五年,罚款四万。
二00七年十二月十三日,经过长达十四个月的非法拘留和无数次的酷刑后,郭飞雄从广州第三看守所转到广东省梅州市监狱服刑。郭飞雄到监狱的当天就受到狱方的威胁,威胁要送他去精神病院。此外,狱方还规定不准他看报读书,不准他与其他犯人说话。同时,强迫他做长时间体力劳动。为了抗议这非人的待遇,郭飞雄在转到梅州监狱的当天宣布绝食一百天。
十二月十八日,在郭飞雄绝食的第五天,在二百多服刑人员面前,狱方暗中指定一个犯人对郭飞雄进行长时间毒打,直到周围观看的二百多犯人看不下去出声制止,打人者才住手。
更令我伤心的是,我的儿子去年九月应该入读小学一年级,可是他却遭到校方的拒绝,现在我的儿子已经失学在家五个多月了。我的将要升中学的女儿也受到失学的威胁,政府有关方面的人威胁郭飞雄说,“我们不会让你的儿子上小学,不会让你的女儿升初中。”
我的孩子经常问我,“为什么爸爸还不回家?为什么我不能上学?”
总统先生,现在我的丈夫还在狱中进行绝食抗争,已绝食三十四天,(狱方给其灌食少量流质食物,灌食量是一天食物量的四分之一。)他的险恶的处境令我极度担忧。我给我国的胡锦涛主席也写了信,但没得到回音,我只好求助于你,求助于崇尚人权的美国政府,希望美国政府能够发出声音,帮助制止中国司法机构这种严重侵犯人权的迫害和酷刑,帮助我的孩子免受歧视和失学的不公,督促中国当局释放郭飞雄。
非常感谢你对中国人权的关注和帮助。
张青
二00八年一月十五日
You can do a search for the text of Gao Zhisheng's letter about Hu Jia's kidnapping. I would like to know what you think about these cases. Please have a read and a think and get back to me.-- Asdfg 12345 19:08, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Still waiting on a response.-- Asdfg 12345 05:16, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
I too am stil waiting on your response to Epoch Times using breast cancer photo to fake a "sexual torture" story. As least I am not so dishonest to "archive" the discussion so I don't have to deal with it. Bobby fletcher ( talk) 16:49, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
I wasn't aware that you expected a response from me on that. It's actually irrelevant to the Epoch Times page since there are no reliable sources behind that. It can't be proven either way, so I don't know what the issue is. It's one peoples' words over another. If someone says it looks like breast cancer, that's fine. That doesn't mean that it doesn't also look like electric baton torture. How many people have seen breasts tortured by electric batons? Not very many at all outside prisons in China, I'd say. To rule out that that could be the cause, given the mountain of evidence around the persecution, and also reliable reports of widespread genital mutilation against practitioners is too much a leap of faith for my tastes. But I'm beginning to think that there's no point communicating with you any further on these points. I can't figure the rationale behind what you are doing, and I'm starting to think that there may not really be one. Let's just keep it business-like from now on. In the meantime, please do stop editing in contravention of WP:DE and WP:TE.-- Asdfg 12345 20:38, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
You can bring up problems with users at WP:AIAV, which is the best way to bring the issue to the attention of the administrators. - Koweja ( talk) 14:42, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for the list, but my English is just no good enough to contribute to the article, May i suggest you to add these claims by Li Hongzhi to the article, and I think Martin is happy to do the copy editing, as long as it is well sourced. If any of those FLG editors has any objection I will back you up (Yes I believed we share the same view on Falun Gong). Again, thanks for your work on FLG related articles. Zixingche ( talk) 09:37, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
If you have material backed by reliable sources that you feel is being unfairly blanked, collect them on a user subpage or in a sandpit where they can be looked over. -- Simon D M ( talk) 18:25, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
1) removal of citation from Zonaeuropa, a source Asdfg had previously accepted:
2) blanking citation from ClearWisdom, a source Asdfg has used himself:
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Falun_Gong_and_live_organ_harvesting&diff=198095416&oldid=198012180
3) blanking news report from The Ottawa Citizen
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Falun_Gong_and_live_organ_harvesting&diff=178483849&oldid=178482051
4) blanking report from US Congressional Research Services
5) blanking neutural POV report by Asia Times reporter Francesco Sisci
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Falun_Gong&diff=199256756&oldid=199249051
6) blanking the fact Epoch Times is affiliated with Falun Gong Too Many!!!
7) Editor Asdfg12345 blanking Encyclopedia Brittanica, as well as source he himself have heavily promoted: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Falun_Gong#RfC_-_Four_notable_sources_BLANKED_by_editor_ASDFG12345
8) Editor Asdfg12345 blanking link from Chinese Foreign Ministry, a notalbe source: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Falun_Gong&diff=222969997&oldid=222929185
Even after the admins okayed the edit:
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Falun_Gong&diff=223041906&oldid=223037963
(TBD, starting in 2006) 1) Removal of citation from usinfo.state.gov relevant to article
Thanks for uploading
Image:2008 Olympic Torch London Attacked.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate
copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{
PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{
self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}}
(to require that you be credited), or any tag
here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI ( talk) 05:38, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:2008 Olympic Torch London Attacked.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Aleen f1 06:26, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Please do not post personal information regarding other users as you did in recent edits to Talk:Falun_Gong#My_own_analysis and Talk:Falun_Gong_and_live_organ_harvesting#STRONGLY_disputing_Asdfg.27s_.22blanking.22_of_fact_from_previously_accepted_source. If you have evidence of such a nature, please forward it privately to the Arbitration Committee. Fred Talk 13:22, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
I have seen your contributions, and I believe they are fairly NPOV. Since we both are attempting to bring neutrality and wrest control from what appears to be FLG disciples, an article regarding FLG I believe needs your attention if you have the time. Both I and Ohconfucius have been dumbfounded by the edits of User:Dilip rajeev, on the article Tiananmen Square self-immolation incident. If possible, you may contribute the the talk page and express what you believe, since you are a major contributor to such topics. Thanks. EgraS ( talk) 05:00, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
Want to express your opinion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Coalition to Investigate the Persecution of Falun Gong (2nd nomination)?-- PCPP ( talk) 10:55, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
If you get some free time, please have a look here, I would appreciate your comments on the CIPFG and Epoch Times, as they relay to the FG series of articles as a whole. MrPrada ( talk) 18:12, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
This is just to let you know that if you do not stop the personal attacks, harassment (i.e. attempting to "out" who you think I am), and assumptions of bad faith, I will open an RfC about it. Please remove references to who you believe is my real-life identity wherever you have posted them. If you continue to engage in this behaviour then I will open a case. (RfC means "request for comment"). Cheers. -- Asdfg 12345 01:02, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
I repeat: please remove the instances where you refer to what you believe is my real life identity. It is obvious that by editing here as Bobby fletcher, a name you are (in)famous for, you must not have a problem being identified. On the other hand, I have asked you to fix the problem, it has been oversighted, and you have continued. You have also mixed it with continual personal attacks and incivility. These are very different issues. -- Asdfg 12345 11:48, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Hey Bobby, how do you know Asdfg12345? I'm really confused.-- PCPP ( talk) 17:55, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Titles such as this does only show that you have no Good Faith anymore [1]. Also you stated that you don't have good faith anymore: "After lenghty encounters with editor Asdfg12345, I can no longer Assume Good Faith." [2].
This means that you are on a crusade and you go whole heartedly against a fundamental principle in Wikipedia WP:AGF.
If you really think that you are right, go ahead Request for Comment, open an ArbCom case, do whatever you think you are entitled to, but be civil. -- HappyInGeneral ( talk) 09:21, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Ah ok, thanks for doing that. Intranetusa ( talk) 23:00, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I responded to your query about the edit to the Falun Gong article on WP:ANI. However that is really for problems requiring administrator intervention. It's not for help in resolving disputes, which you don't need an admin for.
If you are in a dispute in future, the first thing to do is to make contact on the talk page of the article. Discuss the difference of opinion there and try to see what the other person's objection is and see if you can fix it.
If you cannot agree with one another and you need more opinions try going to WP:RFC and follow the instructions under "Request comment on articles, templates, or categories".
If you need advice or are just stuck and don't know how to proceed, try Wikipedia:Questions which should show you where to look next. If you find you're still stuck, you can ask me for help. -- Jenny 10:12, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
I see that I seem to have stumbled across your old war with the FLG trio of abusers, this is never going to end until we get them banned is it? :( Laomei ( talk) 17:52, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
I have responded to your comment on that discussion page. Please do not revert further edits to the article without first reaching a consensus at the talk page. Thank you. — Politizer( talk • contribs ) 22:24, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war on articles related to Chinese gymnasts. Note that the
three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the
three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be
blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a
consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue
dispute resolution.
LedRush (
talk)
23:41, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
I am very offended by your recent post attempting to slander me at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject China. Please stop this immediately, or I will be forced to report this to an administrator.
And, just to make this official:
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to
attack other editors. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the
welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. —
Politizer(
talk •
contribs )
21:16, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
I am reproducing here the message I left you at Talk:He Kexin:
For those reasons, please do not continue adding this uninformative information unless you can integrate it into the article for real. Simply adding a random paragraph to say that someone's parents were indignant does not contribute anything real to anyone's understanding of what happened. Wikipedia is not a place for a random collection of all the random things you want to say; everything you add must fit into the article somehow. If you continue this disruptive editing, we will have no choice but to give you further warnings. — Politizer( talk • contribs ) 00:00, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
This message is to inform you that I have reported you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR for multiple reverts to He Kexin and Age requirements in gymnastics, as well as general edit warring. If you have anything to say, you may comment on the discussion there. — Politizer( talk • contribs ) 00:34, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Please read How to create links. When linking to a Wikipedia page or talk page, you should use internal links (made with [[ and ]]), not external links as you have consistently been doing. — Politizer( talk • contribs ) 01:12, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Please read the guidelines for citing sources and the guidelines for creating footnotes. Some of your additions of footnotes, including the one you discussed in your recent post at Talk:He Kexin, have included inappropriate titles that you made up for articles that already have titles. This could be seen as a serious Wikipedia offense—essentially trying to misrepresent the content of an article—and must stop immediately. — Politizer( talk • contribs ) 01:53, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Per a complaint at WP:AN3. EdJohnston ( talk) 21:53, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Bobby_fletcher: please DO NOT use company proxies when you want to get in an edit war... Your behavior caused MANY people besides yourself to be blocked. If you feel the need to violate rules that will get you blocked, feel free. Just please be polite and do it from home, thanks!
Nothingofwater (
talk)
22:46, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
I mean this not at all as a threat, but only as advice: as you have already been blocked once for your actions at He Kexin and related articles, you are at risk of being blocked again for a much longer period, or banned, if you start to repeat the sort of editing you were doing earlier—and it will take much less disruptive editing on your part to get an administrator to block you. For that reason, it is in your own best interest not to re-open old arguments, especially on those pages.
As for your insertion of information at He Kexin, I have already expressed my opinions on that over and over again, in many different ways, and I do not with to get involved in that argument again. If you want to continue your previous actions and keep on repeating yourself without offering any new arguments, you are welcome to do it, but you'll have to do it with someone else. — Politizer( talk • contribs ) 13:10, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
Please don't try to start a fight at Talk:One-child policy. If you have specific, constructive suggestions for improvement, then make those suggestions so that people may address them and improve the article. But don't just show up and say the article is bad. You're not going to improve any articles by just saying such vague and antagonistic things. — Politizer( talk • contribs ) 20:10, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
You are starting an edit war again. Since the version of the article without a separate "sources" section had already been in place for about a week before you removed it, you were the first one to revert without discussion. Therefore, please take everything you are saying about "please don't revert without discussing first," and apply that to yourself. If you really want to have a civil discussion, leave the page the way it was before you got there today, and then reach a consensus at the talk page. But don't come in and make edits to what had been an accepted version of the article, and then say that other editors need to reach a consensus before they can remove your unaccepted edits. If you continue your edit warring, I will not hesitate to report you again. — Politizer talk/ contribs 02:57, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
Please do not add copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder, as you did to
One-child policy. For
legal reasons, we cannot accept
copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be
blocked from editing.
This edit inserted text directly plagiarized from here. — Politizer talk/ contribs 05:52, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
The real problem here is not the text, but Bobby Fletcher's unwillingness to say "sorry, I made a mistake, let's go fix it". He clearly plagarized, Politizer asked in the nicest possible terms to get it fixed, and a third editor came in and indicated that the passage was plagiarized and Bobby Fletcher still reacted with vitriol and denial. When presented with cool heads and helping hands, it's best not to spit in their faces. LedRush ( talk) 14:37, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
Response to: "I disagree. You are the one who cited the plagiarism wiki. The only reason I objected to your warning is because it makes no sense. You mixed up copyrigth and plagairsm, and all the cites I'm working with came from you. Which is it? If it's copyright it allows fair use. If it's plagiarism wikipedia have it's current state of rules. I've on more than one occasion offered to go to the admins, and I'll again offer it here in front of everyone. Bobby fletcher ( talk) 23:22, 27 October 2008 (UTC)"
Just so you know, I moved the under-construction factbox from Talk:One-child policy#Sandbox: Provincial adoption of national family planning policy to User:Politizer/One-child policy by province in my userspace so it can be worked on there. — Politizer talk/ contribs 20:41, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
Bobby fletcher, there is a content dispute going on at He Kexin; one editor is reverting He's date of birth repeatedly. I started a discussion here. — Politizer talk/ contribs 23:17, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
Hey there, could you please take a look at this discussion? Martin Rundkvist ( talk) 14:59, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Hey Bobby fletcher, Politizer here (I have changed my username). It looks like you have been away for a while, but anyway, if you get this message, I was wondering if you are still interested in working on User:Rjanag/One-child policy by province, the list of province-specific family planning policies. I think it would be a good article/table to have, but I myself probably do not have the resources to finish it; if you or someone else has the information, though, then I will at least help with editing, organizing, etc. rʨanaɢ talk/ contribs 13:27, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi Bobby Fletcher. I was thinking of having another attempt at taking the FLG issue to higher wikipedia authorities, as ArbCom decisions for NPOV has certainly not been enforced. The state of the article (and all FLG-related articles) is getting worse and worse and nothing is being done. The FLG agenda is perpetuating across Wikipedia. Do you have any pointers on this issue? Colipon+( T) 17:48, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Talk:Persecution_of_Falun_Gong_in_the_People's_Republic_of_China#Requested_move_2 Irbisgreif ( talk) 18:47, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
Kindly note that an Enforcement case has just been filed against Dilip rajeev here over his editing at the Falun Gong family of articles and elsewhere. You might like to comment. Please note that this is a permalink; any commenting should be done only after clicking on the 'Project page' tab. Ohconfucius ( talk) 09:57, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
Welcome back to editing Falun Gong articles. You should know that there is currently an arbitration case in its final stage regarding the Falun Gong subject area. Because of your recent edits, you were mentioned negatively [3] in some of the proceedings. I suggest that you study some of the proposed decision, including the new remedy, and try your best to adhere to WP:V, WP:NPOV, WP:NPA, etc to avoid sanctions. A lot has changed since you were last active: this and this page document some of the dispute resolution history. In particular, I would suggest that you not complain to User:Homunculus or User:TheSoundAndTheFury about Falun Gong activism, as you have done, [4] since they themselves are accused of the same. If you have any questions about editing here, feel free to ask me. Shrigley ( talk) 02:23, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
While I don't normally attack people for their politics, you make it such a strong point of your contributions that I will offer a word of gratuitous advice. Don't pick a fight on Tiananmen Square, your POV Is against consensus both here on Wikipedia and in the world in general. Frankly, it's sick. Stick to Falun Gong bashing, it's not fashionable, but at least many rational thinking people would agree with you. -- PalaceGuard008 ( Talk) 10:08, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident in which you may be involved. The thread is Bobby fletcher. Thank you. — Drm310 ( talk) 13:17, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
Since the initial Conflict of Interest filing did not lead to a resolution or get administrator attention, I have started a new section about your conduct on the Arbitration Enforcement noticeboard. You are welcome to post a response to that page. [7]. Thanks —Zujine| talk 12:15, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
Please note that as per the consensus at the abovementioned AE discussion ( link), you are now topic-banned from all edits – including discussion – relating to Falun Gong, for a period of 1 year.
It has also been alleged that you have been editing logged-out with the IP 175.176.145.134 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS) to continue an edit-war on Tiananmen Square protests of 1989. Let me warn you not to try that; it will be treated as sockpuppet abuse and lead to blocks. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:29, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
13:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Bobby fletcher. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Welcome! (We can't say that loudly enough!)
Here are a few links you might find helpful:
You can sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing ~~~~; our software automatically converts it to your username and the date.
If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on
my talk page. Or, please come to the
New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}}
on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.
We're so glad you're here! — The-thing (Talk) (Stuff I did) 21:24, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
Are those sites on the main Falun Gong page? Jsw663 04:42, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to
talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should
sign your posts by typing four
tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the
Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --
SineBot (
talk)
01:28, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/17/international/asia/17china.html?pagewanted=1 this is the report. I think you ought to read the whole thing. It's quite detailed, and I think that this kind of information may assist you to make more informed decisions about your stance toward certain political entities.-- Asdfg 12345 00:20, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Did you read the article? I would like to hear your thoughts about it. PS: You are right that I should examine my own conduct and attitude. That is very true, and thank you for reminding me. Sometimes I become annoyed with the way you present your arguments. On the other hand, I think it will be fine if you simply add information that can be used for the articles to the talk pages, with a very short, bland note. Please let me know what you think about the Shanwei Massacre.-- Asdfg 12345 16:27, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
By the way, I want to know if you have read that NYT article on the Shanwei massacre. Please tell me if you have or have not read it, and if you have not, please find some time to take a look.-- Asdfg 12345 01:21, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
What about where the police would shoot and injure a villager, then walk to them and shoot them again at close range? Do you have a problem with that?-- Asdfg 12345 19:01, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
May I also ask whether you have lived in mainland China? I would like to understand what you think about these cases like how Hu Jia's lawyer was arrested, and Hu Jia was arrested, and his wife locked in her house, and their laptop, cel. phone confiscated? Do you acknowledge that the CCP is violating the basic human rights of many of its citizens for the purpose of maintaining political power? -- Asdfg 12345 23:18, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
Of course not. It's wrong. Using violence against violence is what people do and have done since always, with few exceptions. I can see how you will be against this, but if you are against violence--ie, the villagers throwing the molotov cocktails--aren't you also against the police shooting the villagers from far away then killing them at close range? And all the other things like torturing dissidents and beating them? Just for speaking against the govt.?-- Asdfg 12345 16:23, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
http://en.epochtimes.com/news/6-3-2/38865.html this might be interesting for you. It's a letter by Gao Zhisheng about Hu Jia's disappearance. What do you think?-- Asdfg 12345 16:29, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Here's another letter, this is from Guo Feixiong's wife: http://en.epochtimes.com/news/8-1-21/64409.html. He isn't guilty of any wrongdoing, but his speaking up for the oppressed is inconvenient for the ruling Party, so they torture him and lock him up. Aren't you disgusted by this?-- Asdfg 12345 21:25, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
But these are open letters, it is just that they have been published in Epoch Times and that's where I saw them. They could have been published anywhere. Epoch Times doesn't have much to do with this. C'mon, that's obvious. I don't know what there is to debate about the reliability of the Epoch Times. I would treat it in the same way as any other primary source for these Falun Gong articles.-- Asdfg 12345 22:48, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm asking you direct and simple questions about your view on basic violations of human rights by the CCP. Why are you avoiding it?-- Asdfg 12345 13:26, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Sure, there's plenty. I will even copy you the text of Guo Feixiong's wife's open letter here, I found this on a non epoch times site: http://www.weijingsheng.org/report/report2008/report2008-01/GuoFXwife080120BushGletterA331-W175.htm:
郭飞雄妻子张青致美国总统布什先生的公开信
注:郭飞雄先生为魏京生基金会2006年第三届“魏京生中国民主斗士奖”得主。请大家关注他的遭遇,并对他及家人提供道义及其它方面的同情与帮助。
尊敬的总统先生:
您好!
我是中国公民张青。我今天给您写这封信是希望您能伸出援手,援救我的丈夫郭飞雄。
郭飞雄曾是二00六年五月您预定要接见的中国民间人权活动人士之一。在二00六年的四月底,郭飞雄应邀到美国参加一个主题为《宗教信仰与法治》的研讨会。在会议结束后的五月十一日,您在白宫接见了从中国前来参加研讨会的三位人士,我丈夫却因非他个人能控制的原因,没有能参加您在白宫举行的与中国民间人权活动人士的会见。虽然他没能参加这次会见,但他非常赞赏您的这一有著特殊意义的举动,他说,这是美国政府对中国民间人权活动的认同和支持。
郭飞雄是中国活跃的人权人士,曾参与多起中国著名的维权事件,例如太石村农民罢免事件,发起并组织营救维权律师高智晟的声援活动等。为此,他屡遭打压,多次入狱。
二00六年九月十四日,郭飞雄又被捕入狱。政府罗织罪名指控他“非法经营”,说他出版了一本揭露中国政坛腐败的杂志《沈阳政坛地震》。早在二00一年,官方就以这个指控罚款郭飞雄十万元。现在,司法当局又搬出这个莫须有的罪名拘捕了郭飞雄。
在广州第一看守所拘留期间,郭飞雄被连续审讯十三个日夜,被强迫不准睡觉;被手脚穿插、全身弯曲地固定铐在木板床上达四十二天;被戴脚镣一百多天。
最残酷的是,二00七年一月二十日,广州司法当局把我丈夫转押到中国东北城市沈阳。沈阳警方把郭飞雄与死刑犯关押在一起,并对他施行了更加惨无人道的酷刑。
二00七年二月十二日,沈阳警方办案人给郭飞雄戴上黑头套,押到秘密地点暴打;反吊我丈夫的双手长时间悬吊在空中;用高压电棒电击他的生殖器。二月十三日,郭飞雄不堪电击生殖器的极度痛苦和羞辱,奋力撞向玻璃,但求一死了之。三月十九日,他们再次用电警棍电击郭飞雄生殖器,达五、六分钟之久。
二00七年十一月十四日,司法当局在没有有效物证的情况下,以用高压电警棍电击生殖器等酷刑逼供得出的口供为证给郭飞雄定罪,判处郭飞雄有期徒刑五年,罚款四万。
二00七年十二月十三日,经过长达十四个月的非法拘留和无数次的酷刑后,郭飞雄从广州第三看守所转到广东省梅州市监狱服刑。郭飞雄到监狱的当天就受到狱方的威胁,威胁要送他去精神病院。此外,狱方还规定不准他看报读书,不准他与其他犯人说话。同时,强迫他做长时间体力劳动。为了抗议这非人的待遇,郭飞雄在转到梅州监狱的当天宣布绝食一百天。
十二月十八日,在郭飞雄绝食的第五天,在二百多服刑人员面前,狱方暗中指定一个犯人对郭飞雄进行长时间毒打,直到周围观看的二百多犯人看不下去出声制止,打人者才住手。
更令我伤心的是,我的儿子去年九月应该入读小学一年级,可是他却遭到校方的拒绝,现在我的儿子已经失学在家五个多月了。我的将要升中学的女儿也受到失学的威胁,政府有关方面的人威胁郭飞雄说,“我们不会让你的儿子上小学,不会让你的女儿升初中。”
我的孩子经常问我,“为什么爸爸还不回家?为什么我不能上学?”
总统先生,现在我的丈夫还在狱中进行绝食抗争,已绝食三十四天,(狱方给其灌食少量流质食物,灌食量是一天食物量的四分之一。)他的险恶的处境令我极度担忧。我给我国的胡锦涛主席也写了信,但没得到回音,我只好求助于你,求助于崇尚人权的美国政府,希望美国政府能够发出声音,帮助制止中国司法机构这种严重侵犯人权的迫害和酷刑,帮助我的孩子免受歧视和失学的不公,督促中国当局释放郭飞雄。
非常感谢你对中国人权的关注和帮助。
张青
二00八年一月十五日
You can do a search for the text of Gao Zhisheng's letter about Hu Jia's kidnapping. I would like to know what you think about these cases. Please have a read and a think and get back to me.-- Asdfg 12345 19:08, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Still waiting on a response.-- Asdfg 12345 05:16, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
I too am stil waiting on your response to Epoch Times using breast cancer photo to fake a "sexual torture" story. As least I am not so dishonest to "archive" the discussion so I don't have to deal with it. Bobby fletcher ( talk) 16:49, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
I wasn't aware that you expected a response from me on that. It's actually irrelevant to the Epoch Times page since there are no reliable sources behind that. It can't be proven either way, so I don't know what the issue is. It's one peoples' words over another. If someone says it looks like breast cancer, that's fine. That doesn't mean that it doesn't also look like electric baton torture. How many people have seen breasts tortured by electric batons? Not very many at all outside prisons in China, I'd say. To rule out that that could be the cause, given the mountain of evidence around the persecution, and also reliable reports of widespread genital mutilation against practitioners is too much a leap of faith for my tastes. But I'm beginning to think that there's no point communicating with you any further on these points. I can't figure the rationale behind what you are doing, and I'm starting to think that there may not really be one. Let's just keep it business-like from now on. In the meantime, please do stop editing in contravention of WP:DE and WP:TE.-- Asdfg 12345 20:38, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
You can bring up problems with users at WP:AIAV, which is the best way to bring the issue to the attention of the administrators. - Koweja ( talk) 14:42, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for the list, but my English is just no good enough to contribute to the article, May i suggest you to add these claims by Li Hongzhi to the article, and I think Martin is happy to do the copy editing, as long as it is well sourced. If any of those FLG editors has any objection I will back you up (Yes I believed we share the same view on Falun Gong). Again, thanks for your work on FLG related articles. Zixingche ( talk) 09:37, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
If you have material backed by reliable sources that you feel is being unfairly blanked, collect them on a user subpage or in a sandpit where they can be looked over. -- Simon D M ( talk) 18:25, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
1) removal of citation from Zonaeuropa, a source Asdfg had previously accepted:
2) blanking citation from ClearWisdom, a source Asdfg has used himself:
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Falun_Gong_and_live_organ_harvesting&diff=198095416&oldid=198012180
3) blanking news report from The Ottawa Citizen
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Falun_Gong_and_live_organ_harvesting&diff=178483849&oldid=178482051
4) blanking report from US Congressional Research Services
5) blanking neutural POV report by Asia Times reporter Francesco Sisci
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Falun_Gong&diff=199256756&oldid=199249051
6) blanking the fact Epoch Times is affiliated with Falun Gong Too Many!!!
7) Editor Asdfg12345 blanking Encyclopedia Brittanica, as well as source he himself have heavily promoted: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Falun_Gong#RfC_-_Four_notable_sources_BLANKED_by_editor_ASDFG12345
8) Editor Asdfg12345 blanking link from Chinese Foreign Ministry, a notalbe source: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Falun_Gong&diff=222969997&oldid=222929185
Even after the admins okayed the edit:
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Falun_Gong&diff=223041906&oldid=223037963
(TBD, starting in 2006) 1) Removal of citation from usinfo.state.gov relevant to article
Thanks for uploading
Image:2008 Olympic Torch London Attacked.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate
copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{
PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{
self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}}
(to require that you be credited), or any tag
here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI ( talk) 05:38, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:2008 Olympic Torch London Attacked.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Aleen f1 06:26, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Please do not post personal information regarding other users as you did in recent edits to Talk:Falun_Gong#My_own_analysis and Talk:Falun_Gong_and_live_organ_harvesting#STRONGLY_disputing_Asdfg.27s_.22blanking.22_of_fact_from_previously_accepted_source. If you have evidence of such a nature, please forward it privately to the Arbitration Committee. Fred Talk 13:22, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
I have seen your contributions, and I believe they are fairly NPOV. Since we both are attempting to bring neutrality and wrest control from what appears to be FLG disciples, an article regarding FLG I believe needs your attention if you have the time. Both I and Ohconfucius have been dumbfounded by the edits of User:Dilip rajeev, on the article Tiananmen Square self-immolation incident. If possible, you may contribute the the talk page and express what you believe, since you are a major contributor to such topics. Thanks. EgraS ( talk) 05:00, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
Want to express your opinion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Coalition to Investigate the Persecution of Falun Gong (2nd nomination)?-- PCPP ( talk) 10:55, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
If you get some free time, please have a look here, I would appreciate your comments on the CIPFG and Epoch Times, as they relay to the FG series of articles as a whole. MrPrada ( talk) 18:12, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
This is just to let you know that if you do not stop the personal attacks, harassment (i.e. attempting to "out" who you think I am), and assumptions of bad faith, I will open an RfC about it. Please remove references to who you believe is my real-life identity wherever you have posted them. If you continue to engage in this behaviour then I will open a case. (RfC means "request for comment"). Cheers. -- Asdfg 12345 01:02, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
I repeat: please remove the instances where you refer to what you believe is my real life identity. It is obvious that by editing here as Bobby fletcher, a name you are (in)famous for, you must not have a problem being identified. On the other hand, I have asked you to fix the problem, it has been oversighted, and you have continued. You have also mixed it with continual personal attacks and incivility. These are very different issues. -- Asdfg 12345 11:48, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Hey Bobby, how do you know Asdfg12345? I'm really confused.-- PCPP ( talk) 17:55, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Titles such as this does only show that you have no Good Faith anymore [1]. Also you stated that you don't have good faith anymore: "After lenghty encounters with editor Asdfg12345, I can no longer Assume Good Faith." [2].
This means that you are on a crusade and you go whole heartedly against a fundamental principle in Wikipedia WP:AGF.
If you really think that you are right, go ahead Request for Comment, open an ArbCom case, do whatever you think you are entitled to, but be civil. -- HappyInGeneral ( talk) 09:21, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Ah ok, thanks for doing that. Intranetusa ( talk) 23:00, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I responded to your query about the edit to the Falun Gong article on WP:ANI. However that is really for problems requiring administrator intervention. It's not for help in resolving disputes, which you don't need an admin for.
If you are in a dispute in future, the first thing to do is to make contact on the talk page of the article. Discuss the difference of opinion there and try to see what the other person's objection is and see if you can fix it.
If you cannot agree with one another and you need more opinions try going to WP:RFC and follow the instructions under "Request comment on articles, templates, or categories".
If you need advice or are just stuck and don't know how to proceed, try Wikipedia:Questions which should show you where to look next. If you find you're still stuck, you can ask me for help. -- Jenny 10:12, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
I see that I seem to have stumbled across your old war with the FLG trio of abusers, this is never going to end until we get them banned is it? :( Laomei ( talk) 17:52, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
I have responded to your comment on that discussion page. Please do not revert further edits to the article without first reaching a consensus at the talk page. Thank you. — Politizer( talk • contribs ) 22:24, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war on articles related to Chinese gymnasts. Note that the
three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the
three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be
blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a
consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue
dispute resolution.
LedRush (
talk)
23:41, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
I am very offended by your recent post attempting to slander me at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject China. Please stop this immediately, or I will be forced to report this to an administrator.
And, just to make this official:
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to
attack other editors. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the
welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. —
Politizer(
talk •
contribs )
21:16, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
I am reproducing here the message I left you at Talk:He Kexin:
For those reasons, please do not continue adding this uninformative information unless you can integrate it into the article for real. Simply adding a random paragraph to say that someone's parents were indignant does not contribute anything real to anyone's understanding of what happened. Wikipedia is not a place for a random collection of all the random things you want to say; everything you add must fit into the article somehow. If you continue this disruptive editing, we will have no choice but to give you further warnings. — Politizer( talk • contribs ) 00:00, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
This message is to inform you that I have reported you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR for multiple reverts to He Kexin and Age requirements in gymnastics, as well as general edit warring. If you have anything to say, you may comment on the discussion there. — Politizer( talk • contribs ) 00:34, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Please read How to create links. When linking to a Wikipedia page or talk page, you should use internal links (made with [[ and ]]), not external links as you have consistently been doing. — Politizer( talk • contribs ) 01:12, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Please read the guidelines for citing sources and the guidelines for creating footnotes. Some of your additions of footnotes, including the one you discussed in your recent post at Talk:He Kexin, have included inappropriate titles that you made up for articles that already have titles. This could be seen as a serious Wikipedia offense—essentially trying to misrepresent the content of an article—and must stop immediately. — Politizer( talk • contribs ) 01:53, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Per a complaint at WP:AN3. EdJohnston ( talk) 21:53, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Bobby_fletcher: please DO NOT use company proxies when you want to get in an edit war... Your behavior caused MANY people besides yourself to be blocked. If you feel the need to violate rules that will get you blocked, feel free. Just please be polite and do it from home, thanks!
Nothingofwater (
talk)
22:46, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
I mean this not at all as a threat, but only as advice: as you have already been blocked once for your actions at He Kexin and related articles, you are at risk of being blocked again for a much longer period, or banned, if you start to repeat the sort of editing you were doing earlier—and it will take much less disruptive editing on your part to get an administrator to block you. For that reason, it is in your own best interest not to re-open old arguments, especially on those pages.
As for your insertion of information at He Kexin, I have already expressed my opinions on that over and over again, in many different ways, and I do not with to get involved in that argument again. If you want to continue your previous actions and keep on repeating yourself without offering any new arguments, you are welcome to do it, but you'll have to do it with someone else. — Politizer( talk • contribs ) 13:10, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
Please don't try to start a fight at Talk:One-child policy. If you have specific, constructive suggestions for improvement, then make those suggestions so that people may address them and improve the article. But don't just show up and say the article is bad. You're not going to improve any articles by just saying such vague and antagonistic things. — Politizer( talk • contribs ) 20:10, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
You are starting an edit war again. Since the version of the article without a separate "sources" section had already been in place for about a week before you removed it, you were the first one to revert without discussion. Therefore, please take everything you are saying about "please don't revert without discussing first," and apply that to yourself. If you really want to have a civil discussion, leave the page the way it was before you got there today, and then reach a consensus at the talk page. But don't come in and make edits to what had been an accepted version of the article, and then say that other editors need to reach a consensus before they can remove your unaccepted edits. If you continue your edit warring, I will not hesitate to report you again. — Politizer talk/ contribs 02:57, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
Please do not add copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder, as you did to
One-child policy. For
legal reasons, we cannot accept
copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be
blocked from editing.
This edit inserted text directly plagiarized from here. — Politizer talk/ contribs 05:52, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
The real problem here is not the text, but Bobby Fletcher's unwillingness to say "sorry, I made a mistake, let's go fix it". He clearly plagarized, Politizer asked in the nicest possible terms to get it fixed, and a third editor came in and indicated that the passage was plagiarized and Bobby Fletcher still reacted with vitriol and denial. When presented with cool heads and helping hands, it's best not to spit in their faces. LedRush ( talk) 14:37, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
Response to: "I disagree. You are the one who cited the plagiarism wiki. The only reason I objected to your warning is because it makes no sense. You mixed up copyrigth and plagairsm, and all the cites I'm working with came from you. Which is it? If it's copyright it allows fair use. If it's plagiarism wikipedia have it's current state of rules. I've on more than one occasion offered to go to the admins, and I'll again offer it here in front of everyone. Bobby fletcher ( talk) 23:22, 27 October 2008 (UTC)"
Just so you know, I moved the under-construction factbox from Talk:One-child policy#Sandbox: Provincial adoption of national family planning policy to User:Politizer/One-child policy by province in my userspace so it can be worked on there. — Politizer talk/ contribs 20:41, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
Bobby fletcher, there is a content dispute going on at He Kexin; one editor is reverting He's date of birth repeatedly. I started a discussion here. — Politizer talk/ contribs 23:17, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
Hey there, could you please take a look at this discussion? Martin Rundkvist ( talk) 14:59, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Hey Bobby fletcher, Politizer here (I have changed my username). It looks like you have been away for a while, but anyway, if you get this message, I was wondering if you are still interested in working on User:Rjanag/One-child policy by province, the list of province-specific family planning policies. I think it would be a good article/table to have, but I myself probably do not have the resources to finish it; if you or someone else has the information, though, then I will at least help with editing, organizing, etc. rʨanaɢ talk/ contribs 13:27, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi Bobby Fletcher. I was thinking of having another attempt at taking the FLG issue to higher wikipedia authorities, as ArbCom decisions for NPOV has certainly not been enforced. The state of the article (and all FLG-related articles) is getting worse and worse and nothing is being done. The FLG agenda is perpetuating across Wikipedia. Do you have any pointers on this issue? Colipon+( T) 17:48, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Talk:Persecution_of_Falun_Gong_in_the_People's_Republic_of_China#Requested_move_2 Irbisgreif ( talk) 18:47, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
Kindly note that an Enforcement case has just been filed against Dilip rajeev here over his editing at the Falun Gong family of articles and elsewhere. You might like to comment. Please note that this is a permalink; any commenting should be done only after clicking on the 'Project page' tab. Ohconfucius ( talk) 09:57, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
Welcome back to editing Falun Gong articles. You should know that there is currently an arbitration case in its final stage regarding the Falun Gong subject area. Because of your recent edits, you were mentioned negatively [3] in some of the proceedings. I suggest that you study some of the proposed decision, including the new remedy, and try your best to adhere to WP:V, WP:NPOV, WP:NPA, etc to avoid sanctions. A lot has changed since you were last active: this and this page document some of the dispute resolution history. In particular, I would suggest that you not complain to User:Homunculus or User:TheSoundAndTheFury about Falun Gong activism, as you have done, [4] since they themselves are accused of the same. If you have any questions about editing here, feel free to ask me. Shrigley ( talk) 02:23, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
While I don't normally attack people for their politics, you make it such a strong point of your contributions that I will offer a word of gratuitous advice. Don't pick a fight on Tiananmen Square, your POV Is against consensus both here on Wikipedia and in the world in general. Frankly, it's sick. Stick to Falun Gong bashing, it's not fashionable, but at least many rational thinking people would agree with you. -- PalaceGuard008 ( Talk) 10:08, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident in which you may be involved. The thread is Bobby fletcher. Thank you. — Drm310 ( talk) 13:17, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
Since the initial Conflict of Interest filing did not lead to a resolution or get administrator attention, I have started a new section about your conduct on the Arbitration Enforcement noticeboard. You are welcome to post a response to that page. [7]. Thanks —Zujine| talk 12:15, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
Please note that as per the consensus at the abovementioned AE discussion ( link), you are now topic-banned from all edits – including discussion – relating to Falun Gong, for a period of 1 year.
It has also been alleged that you have been editing logged-out with the IP 175.176.145.134 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS) to continue an edit-war on Tiananmen Square protests of 1989. Let me warn you not to try that; it will be treated as sockpuppet abuse and lead to blocks. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:29, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
13:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Bobby fletcher. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)