User talk:Jamesofur/Archives11

Hi, Jamesofur! I want to welcome you to Wikipedia and thank you for your edit! I hope you like editing here and being part of Wikipedia and that we will see you around for a long time to come. When you leave messages on Discussion pages (like this one, or the article discussion pages) you want to try and remember to sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); when you save the page, this will turn into your name and the date. If you need help, check out the Wikipedia Cheatsheet, Wikipedia:Questions or of course feel free to ask me on my discussion page. If you put {{helpme}} (and a note about what you need help with), someone will come by shortly to answer your question. Again, welcome to Wikipedia!

Testing testing testing Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse quis ligula tortor, vel tristique mauris. Curabitur euismod ultrices justo in dictum. Vivamus viverra, velit eu commodo dictum, arcu libero tempor leo, ac tempus purus turpis sed dui. Duis accumsan tempor adipiscing.

Again, welcome to Wikipedia! James of UR (talk) 23:37, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Dear Mr. Jamesofur:

I am contacting you on a matter of some delicacy, because you resolved an issue in June 2010 that has (unfortunately) never gone away.

In June 2010 you upheld the legitimacy of the following Nelson Denis photo:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2010_June_3#File_talk:Denis_Photo-1.jpg

There was no real copyright issue. I am a lawyer, a former NY State Assemblyman, and we both understood what was involved. The real underlying issue was my status as a "sockpuppet" of an "indefinitely banned user." Today, I really need to resolve this.

I was indefinitely banned after I made the following single edit on December 1, 2008. The edit was backed by an article from the New York Daily News, for which I provided the footnote and the link:

http:https://www.search.com.vn/wiki/index.php?lang=en&q=Adam_Clayton_Powell_IV_(politician)&diff=255143973&oldid=253153580

In fact, the New York Daily News footnote and link which I provided, was the only newspaper citation in the entire article. However the creator of the page, an Administrator named Bearian, banned me indefinitely because of this sourced edit.

http:https://www.search.com.vn/wiki/index.php?lang=en&q=Special:Log/block&page=User:Nelsondenis248

I found this odd - an indefinite ban for one, properly sourced edit. The reason became apparent some time later, by Bearian's own admission, in his own words:

• Nelson A. Denis is well known in Albany, New York and in Harlem as being a political adversary of Adam. C. Powell IV. I recall that I blocked User:Nelsondenis248. It was a SPA to defame Powell, but whether it was Denis or a fan of his I'm not sure. Disclosure: I've met Powell and some of my students have been, or are, interns in his LOB office. That having been said, I have no opinioon on the sock issue. Bearian (talk) 15:15, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

The link for the above quote is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Nelsondenis248/Archive

So I was banned for a properly sourced edit, because Bearian provided interns to Adam Clayton Powell IV, then Powell was later accused of raping legislative interns(!) I had no way of knowing this relationship between Bearian and Powell at the time, and I am NOT interested in it now. However this indefinite ban has placed a scarlet letter on me, and any input I try to make into Wikipedia.

I have no further interest in visiting the Powell page. That ended a long time ago. But I DO have an interest and a right to defend my reputation, both inside Wikipedia and outside of it. Given Bearian's COI situation (and the delicacy of this matter) I am writing to you, to respectfully request that this indefinite ban be lifted, since it should not have been issued in the first place.

This is not merely a matter of principle. Despite your own reasoning on June 2010, the same attempt is being made RIGHT NOW by the same editor Off2RioRob and another named ScottyBerg. Photos have been removed improperly and repeatedly, in the past few hours:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_files/2011_June_9#File:NDENIS_FOTO_-1.jpg

If I try to defend them, these editors accuse me of "block evasion" and "sockpuppetry." A few months ago, these same two editors left the article in this condition:

http:https://www.search.com.vn/wiki/index.php?lang=en&q=Nelson_Antonio_Denis&oldid=402434564

When I tried to defend the article, they waged a collateral "sockpuppet" attack. It is difficult for me to keep defending this, since I am immediately accused of being a banned user and a sockpuppet. This accusation is occurring again, RIGHT NOW:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Nelsondenis248

I would not be surprised if this very communication with you, is used in allegations of "sockpuppetry" and "block evasion." This would never have happened if I hadn't been banned in the first place...for making one, properly referenced edit.

Given the COI issue with the administrator named Bearian, I am hoping that you can resolve this with some discretion. I repeat what I stated earlier: I have no interest in visiting the Powell article, and I certainly have no interest in embarrassing Bearian.

But I cannot sit idly by, and allow editors such as ScottyBerg and Off2RioRob to manipulate and control all public reference to me on Wikipedia, with no means to defend myself. They are willing to ignore your own guidance in this matter. At the very least, I should be allowed to defend myself - if only a little bit. Otherwise Wikipedia will be pernicious to myself and other people, and conflicts will escalate. I am seeking to avoid this.

Please excuse the length of this note. Any assistance you can provide will be greatly appreciated.

Regards,

Nelson Denis, Esq.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.57.39.35 (talk) 23:22, 13 June 2011 (UTC)