User talk:Spitzer19

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Welcome! 2 Your edits 3 February 2008 4 Mar 2008 5 New Force (Italy) 6 March 2008 7 WP:3RR 8 Zionism and Nazi Germany 9 Your recent edits 10 Re: Unfounded accusations of sock-puppetry 11 Your continuing personal attacks and vandalism of New Force (Italy) 12 Blocked 24 hours 13 Sockpuppetry case

[edit] Welcome!

[edit] Your edits

Hello. Wikipedia requires that additions are verifiable and attributed to reliable, reputable sources. I've reverted your edits to Ze'ev Jabotinsky and Nazi Germany. Your addition to the former is controversial, highly dubious from my limited understanding of the man, and uncited. Additionally, the source used to support your edit to Nazi Germany is questionable due to its explicit partisan stance. Please review WP:RS. Your additions can be restored assuming you can verify them in accordance with content policy (linked to in the above welcome message). Regards, SoLando (Talk) 22:14, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] February 2008

Please do not add unsourced or original content, as you did to Nazi Germany. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Gwernol 03:29, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Let me second SoLando's opinion above about your edits to Ze'ev Jabotinsky. Your "source" is completely unreliable per Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. Unless you can find independent, reliable, published sources, you cannot include this material in Wikipedia articles. Continuing to attempt to do so will lead to you being blocked from editing without further notice. Thanks, Gwernol 03:33, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mar 2008

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, as you did to User:Spylab, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Veritas (talk) 17:17, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] New Force (Italy)

I'm inclined to believe your statement that the references exist. However, you haven't given any link to those references so someone with a passing knowledge of Italian can go check them out independently. Please provide references for the Party's platform, even if it's just a link to a platform page on their website. Argyriou (talk) 17:52, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] March 2008

Please stop deleting sourced information as you have been doing on Neo-Nazism. Continuing to do so amounts to vandalism, and can result in your being blocked. Boodlesthecat (talk) 21:00, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Duke once wore a Nazi suit when he was a teenager and has never been part of a Neo-Nazi organization. Furtehrmore, the NY times is hardly a scholarly source. There are no details given to his alleged Nazi involvment.

WP:RS's cite him as having been a neo-Nazi. Stop pushing your POV in this article. If you revert again I will take it to a noticeboard. Boodlesthecat (talk) 21:13, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

They do not cite him as to having tried to revive Nazism--Spitzer19 (talk) 01:45, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WP:3RR

Please make sure that you are familiar with the Three-Revert-Rule that restricts editors to three reversions to an article within a 24hr time period. This is to prevent edit warring. Instead, discuss controversial edits on the talk page before making them. Thank you.--Veritas (talk) 22:20, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Zionism and Nazi Germany

I am really conserned with your edits as you have done here. Even though some Zionist and Jewish people supported Hitler you can not just say that in an edit summary but you need to edit it into an appropriate article and support it with references. Also saying, "Nazi regime's systematic mass murder of anti-Zionist Jews, political opponents, and other minorities like homosexuals and gypsies in a genocide known as the Holocaust or Shoah," just does not make sense.

You said, "Nazi mass murder of anti-Zionist." This is nonsens! Nazies murdered Zionist not anti-Zionist. This looks like violations of WP:OR and WP:NPOV. Igor Berger (talk) 02:42, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

It makes perfect sense, Streicher actually said at the Nurenberg trial that Jews had to be taken as a model. Nazis didn't want Jews in Europe and didn't want those in what they viewed as the Aryan race to mix with Jews. Zionists wanted Jews to leave the West and immigrate to Palestine. An alliance between them would be logical. AS for your being concerned, this is Wikipedia where information and knowledge is supposed to be open for debate, unless of course you have something to hide.--Spitzer19 (talk) 04:44, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia is WP:NOT#FORUM and not WP:SOAP. It is not a place to debate. If you have references per WP:V please add the information to appropriate article. Please avoid original research. By you addiding the information as you did here it shows bias and POV pushing. Make it encyclopedic not POV. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Igorberger (talk • contribs) 05:22, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I never said it was a forum, but it is a place where decisions are supposed to be debated so that only the most factual information gets admitted and not a place for people such as yourself to play the soap game by saying how you are very "concerned" just because there is proof that points to things that go against what you believe, or atleast want you want others to believe. Furthermore, it is inappropriate to make assertions and expect others to take them at face value.--Spitzer19 (talk) 05:33, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I never said you cannot discuss the information you want to add, I said Wikipedia is not a palace to debate what is right and what is wrong. It is not a pace to take sides. It is encyclopedia! Add information with references after you have come to a consensus with other editors. Igor Berger (talk) 05:38, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your recent edits

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. If you can't type the tilde character, you should 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) 05:37, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Unfounded accusations of sock-puppetry

I believe that you or someone using your PC has used the first username here and the related IP address to avoid the 3RR.

The evidence for which I have provided on the relevant user and talk pages.

The edits made by both you and the suspected sockpuppets are consistent in nature and almost identical in tone, i.e. the removal of a source on this page despite a consensus on the talk page that this source is reliable.

Whether or not the source is reliable is not the matter I question. I believ eyou may have a point but I believe you have used the IP and the other username to avoid the 3RR. BigHairRef | Talk 05:49, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your continuing personal attacks and vandalism of New Force (Italy)

The following claims you made in edit summaries are false, malicious,and constitute personal attacks that you make to justify your continuing vandalism:

• "I read the books used as references and none provide any information in regards to why Neo-Fascism is a more appropriate term for Forza Nuova than Fascism"

• "Reverted misinformation that is not supported by the sources given"

• Your fourth revert in 24 hours contained this lie: "Reverted misinformation that is not supported by the sources given, and that subsequently qualifies as POV vandalism from user who has violated the 3 revert rule repeatedly."

In fact, here is what the three refs I supplied (and which you keep deleting) say:

ref #1 "This infamous Italian neo-fascist [Fiore] has just created a new political party called Forza Nuova (New Force)"

ref #2 "the International Third Position (ITP), an international alliance of European neo-fascist organizations created and managed by a group of Italian ex-terrorists involved in the 1980 Bologna bombing, led by Roberto Fiore. Its Italian wing is called New Force (Forza nuova)"

ref #3 "A popular language college in London is controlled by the leader of an Italian neo-fascist party who has links to the British National party, the Guardian has learned." and,

"He had already founded Forza Nuova, an anti-immigration party committed to revoking laws that ban the recreation of the fascist party. A year after his return he was quoted as saying: "If you call me a neo-fascist I won't kick up a fuss.""

Your continuing disruptions, vandalism false claims and hostile attitude will soon have you blocked, and if you continue, blocked indefinitely.

As a show of good faith, you should self revert the false claims you made above. Boodlesthecat (talk) 19:34, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

My claims are not false, your insistence to keep Neo-Fascist in the article is only backed by sources that merely quote the conjecture of the media. That is hardly a sufficient basis to support this concept when you have absolutely no logical case. Neo is used as a prefix to people who adhere to a modified version of an ideology. That is not the case for Forza Nuova.--Spitzer19 (talk) 00:53, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Blocked 24 hours

For edit warring on on New Force (Italy), you have been blocked for a period of 24 hours. After the block expires, please attempt discussion before reverting. Any further reverts after the block will result in additional blocks of increasing duration. - auburnpilot talk 21:29, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sockpuppetry case

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Spitzer19 for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. This is not personal by the way, I thought it only fair to give you a fair chance to respond to tag at top of you page and remove it if the report is in your favour. I have no interest in the pages mentioned in the report and will not be editing them as I have no knowledge on the subject. BigHairRef | Talk 07:10, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I've removed the tag, as the Checkuser result shows that the suspicion is unfounded. Argyriou (talk) 18:10, 10 March 2008 (UTC)