Stephen Bain wrote: Done. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review#User:Rgulerdem.2FWik… -- Raphael

The highly disruptive (on both Wiki-En and Wiki-Tr) and now permanently blocked editor [[User:Rgulerdem]] (Resid Gulerdem) started a policy called [[Wikipedia:Wikiethics]] that was soundly rejected by the community. A month or two later due to his highly repetitive disruptiveness Resid Gulerdem became permanently blocked (with much of his disruptions stemming from his demonstration of ownership relative to Wikiethics). Resid Gulerdem's permanent block was lifted under the mentoship of [[User:Johntex]] who recommended that Gulerdem proceed with developing the formerly rejected policy proposal he founded in his own user space where he could exercise the kind of ownership control upon it that he needed. Resid Gulerdem became permanently blocked again after Check User evidence proved he'd returned to his disruptive ways while editing on [[Fethullah Gülen]] due to his not following his mentor's advice to refrain from such behavior. After Resid Gulerdem's permanent block he returned to editing his user page policy using anoymous IP addresses (in the 216.xxx.xx.xx range - From University of Indiana) (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_CheckUser/Rgulerdem ). Admin [[User:Cyde]] became aware of a banned editor editing in his user space and deleted this user space copy of the Wikiethics policy to discourage the return of the banned editor. Just prior to the deletion of Resid Gulerdem's user page version of Wikiethics [[User:Raphael1]] (Raphael Wegmann) saved a copy sensing that Resid Gulerdem's copy was about to be rightly deleted. Raphael Wegmann mentioned having saved a copy of Resid's user page in his own user space here on the Wiki-En-I mail list though which admin [[User:Thebainer]] became aware of this additional copy and deleted it "because of the GFDL requirement that the history of all pages be kept". Now Raphael Wegmann wants Resid Gulerdem's original user space copy of Wikiethics to be undeleted so that he can get his own user space copy undeleted. Essentially this whole thing has been a rather large waste of time as an extension of Resid Gulerdem's disruptive ways and Raphael Wegmann appears to fail to realize this. Hope that helps you understand the situation. Sincerely, -Scott Stevenson [[User:Netscott]] On 6/5/06, Steve Bennett <stevagewp(a)gmail.com> wrote:

On 6/6/06, Stephen Bain <stephen.bain(a)gmail.com> wrote: Ok, I'm really not getting this at all. Lots of people contribute to proposal, presumably because they wanted that proposal to exist. Someone deletes it. Someone else recreates it but fails to properly acknowledge the original creators. You re-delete it, citing the interests of the unacknowledged? Surely common sense dictates that the original creators would prefer the proposal be recreated - acknowledge or not - than that it be deleted? It's a real stretch to assume that they would rather it be deleted than that it exist without their name on it. Also bear in mind that the recreator didn't have access to the history...but you did, and could have copied it to the new article's talk page, if it bothered you. Maybe there were good reasons for deleting it, but that's a pretty strange justification for re-deleting something. Steve