Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Geopolitical ethnic and religious conflicts Information & Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Geopolitical ethnic and religious conflicts Links at HealthHaven.com

Shortcuts: WP:ECCN WP:CCN

This noticeboard aims to serve as a place where incidents of the principle of neutrality being violated due to chauvinist and nationalist sentiment can be reported. It is common for edit wars, revert-warring, and general disruption to be caused on Wikipedia by real-world ethnic, national, and cultural conflicts, as the partisans in these disputes take their quarrels into cyberspace.

When posting here, please link to the relevant article(s). If you mention specific editors, please inform them of the thread. Consider also including some background information, not only relating to the specific dispute, but also the relevant ethnic conflict. Everyone knows about the Israel-Palestine conflict, but the Nagorno-Karabakh War is rather more obscure. If you do this you are far more likely to get an effective response.

Situations requiring immediate administrative action should go to the incidents noticeboard. Situations requiring immediate enforcement of arbitration committee remedies should go to the enforcement noticeboard.

Archives
1

[edit] Creativity Alliance

Could some additional eyes be turned on Creativity Alliance? It is a White Supremacist organization with an editor who thinks that Wikipedia is the place to present the organization's mission statement, holidays and other information that is not supported by third party sources. Thanks, Abductive (reasoning) 07:00, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

What is the article about? A group? A web site? As far as I can tell from the text of it, this could be one guy with a blog, i.e. not notable for Wikipedia purposes. --FOo (talk) 21:45, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

I don't know. Abductive (reasoning) 00:07, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

The Creativity Alliance is a 'secular religion' which touts white supremacy. They've got quite a following. Not pleasant but definitely notable. Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 18:34, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Muhammad of Ghor

I've corrected some information in the Muhammad of Ghor article, concerning the ethnic (or race), religion sect, place of death, family relation, etc. There are these 2 users (User:Adil your who is Pakistani and User:Tajik) who are reverting it back to the totally false version, they claim that my corrections are POVs. How is it a POV if sources such as Encyclopedia Britannica, Columbia University, Nancy Dupree (an American specialist on history who spent over 30 years inside Afghanistan studying the history of that nation) from Kabul University, Encarta, John Walsh from Shinawatra University, and others all mention the same exact thing I've add into the article? Can someone please help settle this and keep eye on the page or protect it from these 2 disruptive users? I'm trying not to break the 3RRs.--119.73.6.155 (talk) 04:55, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

The IP is that of banned User:NisarKand/User:Khampalak/User:Alishah85, by now banned with over 100 sockpuppet accounts. The information he inserts in the article is POV and falsification. Though it may seem "sourced" to someone who is not into oriental studies, major reference works, especially the Encyclopaedia of Islam (EI) and Encyclopaedia Iranica (EIr), do not support his POV at all. He distorted the main article on the Ghurids as well. His comments on the talk page prove that he is absolutely no expert on the subject, nor does he have the slightest understanding of oriental or Islamic history. He makes some search on google and then quotes selectively. There is an excellent scholarly article available online, written by Clifford Edmund Bosworth, the world's foremost specialist on Ghurid history: see here. The IP also claims that he has used scholarly sources, which is not true. Encarta is not a scholarly source, it has never been, and - as the Wikipedia site explains - it will be shut down in the comming few months. His reference to the Encyclopaedia Britannica is misleading, because he does not cite the main article on the Ghurids but a side-reference in an unrelated article, which is not reliable. His claim that he has cited works of the Columbia University is totally wrong, because he has not. In fact, he has removed the EIr which is a grand project of the Columbia University, edited by Prof. Ehsan Yarshater. Anyone who has even minor knowledge of oriental studies or Iranistics knows that the IP - the banned user NisarKand/Khampalak/Alishah85 - is propagating unscholarly, pseudo-scientific, nationalistic POV. Unfortunately, there is not a single admin who has any knowledge of oriental studies or who knows how to differentiate between sources and references. That's why the main article of the Ghurids was protected in a factually wrong version, contradicting itself. I frankly ask the admins to restore the last stable version of the article (16:28, 18 September 2009 by User:Adil your), before it was distorted and falsified by banned users and anon IPs. Tajik (talk) 11:54, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Cyrus cylinder as a charter of human rights, redux

The issue of the Cyrus cylinder as a supposed charter of human rights has come up yet again on the Human rights article (summary version: Iranian nationalists and political figures claim that the CC is the world's first "human rights charter"; historians reject this viewpoint as tendentious and anachronistic). This has been discussed on the fringe theories noticeboard on two previous occasions. It's being discussed at Talk:Human rights#Cyrus Cylinder, where the usual suspects are demanding that it be included. Some input from outside editors would be appreciated. -- ChrisO (talk) 00:05, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Immigrant criminality

This seems like the right noticeboard for this, though there's no current heated dispute. This article, Immigrant criminality, seems to suffer from some of the problems that Race and crime in the United States has seen, which is just dumping in statistics and anecdotes of criminality among immigrants with no real analysis or discussion of the issues. Help would be appreciated on seeing if it can be knocked into shape. Fences&Windows 22:19, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] 1953 Iranian coup d'état

There is a discussion on the talk page that is rapidly acquiring overtones of national conflict. The edits at issue are probably best summarized in terms of this diff, and there has been a discussion on the talk page to which fresher eyes and opinions would be most welcome. Ray^Talk 05:00, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Tiruvalluvar

Someone seems intent on "proving" that this man isn't a Jain. I've removed the inappropriate "religion" section a few times but it has been reinserted. Pollinosisss (talk) 17:45, 3 November 2009 (UTC)