Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/Boris Stomakhin

message: I would like to hear both parties' views without complicated discussion in the first instance. To that end, I'd like you both to put a statement below, under your named section. Please don't engage in a detailed rebuttal of the other editor's points for now. I want to get an overview of the situation first.
When we have got to this place, we can then decide exactly what issues are under contest. From there we will hopefully be able to find a solution you can all be happy with.
Basically, a short (couple of paragraphs, maximum) summary of whether you believe the content in question is POV/not POV, a violation of BLP/not a violation, and why. Once this is established, then we can start to work on a comprimise version.
I'm sorry that this may seem complex and drawn-out, but the first 3-4 days are always the worst, because I need to establish a starting point before I can mediate effectively.
Cheers, Daniel 05:54, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Initial Statements

message: Biophys has made a sterile article using only pro-Stomakhin sources. Everything about Stomakhin is written by the hands of his supporters in the current version. Biophys has elaborated definition of Stomakhin acitivities given by his supporters. As a result, criminal Boris Stomakhin who called to exterminate Russians as a nation is portrayed as innocent victim of bloody Putin regime.
For example, in the opening paragraph, Biophys states that Stomakhin "openly challenged Putin policy in Chechnya". However, a lot of other people make it every day in Russia and me too. 
Biophys has described Stomakhin crime as a "hate speech", but according to the court sentence it is "calls to overthrow violantly government and constitutional regime", "extremist activities" (calls to exterminate Russians and calls to commit terorit attacks. By using this overgeneralization, Biophys creates an impression that Stomakhin is really nice guy, while in the reality Stomakhin said that all Russians should be killed.
Another thing, is that Biophys sterilizes the article by deleting all the statements of Stomakhin which compromise him. Stomakhin was publishing his articles on his organization website - http://rko.marsho.net - where all of his articles are stored. These articles contain all his calls to exterminate Russians, to overthrow constitutional regime and calls to commit terrorist attacks. Biophys deletes every citation from his website. Why we couldn't publish the works of that "journalist" if he is called journalist? Moreover some excerpts from his articles are published by journalists - however Biophys deletes even them.
Biophys has gone so far, that he deletes information that supporter of Stomakhin - Gannushkina denounced writings of Stomakhin as "outrageous", that supporter of Stomakhin - Novodvorskaya - said that Stomakhin "compromised the opposition movement", that Novodvorskaya party refused to defend her former memeber - Stomakhin.
Biophys deletes criticism of Stomakhin by non-supporters - journalists of respectable newspapers.
Biophys also deletes the information about Union of Councils for Soviet Jews, which have made false statemements that Stomakhin was pushed from window, while in the reality Stomakhin attempted to escape from police again.
I want to reinsert such sources as court statement, Stomakhin articles, journalists criticism of Stomakhin, and information about Stomakhin from Gannushkina and Novodvorskaya. 
The same is the case in Yevgenia Albats article. I have described well know event, when Albats publicly attacked another journalist, because she dared to criticize Anna Politkovskaya. There was even camapaign in Russian internet with slogan: "Alabts - get out of air". Vlad fedorov 05:13, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Vlad fedorov

message: I think that our editorial conflict is not about Boris Stomakhin. It is about Russian secret services, KGB (currently named FSB) and affiliated organization GRU. All these nineteen articles, which became a subject of RR warring, are  created or significantly extended by me AND they (a) describe KGB operations (like Internet brigades which caused most of the emotions), or (b) describe people allegedly prosecuted by KGB; or (c) describe people who did research on KGB subjects.  
I have created and edited numerous articles on these subjects in complete agreement with WP policies, namely WP:SOURCE and especially WP:BLP. Everything I did was  supported by multiple reliable sources. Vlad is trying to "censor" me or make these articles unreadable by all available means, including:
*(a) marking articles for deletion (as Internet brigades), 
*(b) allegedly vandalizing the articles (I can provide a lot of examples),
*(c) inserting  irrelevant or duplicated texts from other WP articles; 
*(d) inserting defamatory poorly sourced claims about people he does not like (victims of KGB/FSB repressions - Boris Stomakhin and researchers of KGB crimes - Yevgenia Albats) 
*(e) marking articles as totally disputed without any discussion or explanations; 
*(f) simply reverting my edits, 
*(g) insulting me personally (I can provide examples); 
*(e) sending false claims about me (such as that I promote "ethnic hatred") to ANI noticebord.        
Biophys 11:59, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Biophys

message: As noted on Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Boris Stomakhin, I need a reconfirmation post-block to ensure we are a) active; and b) happy to continue mediation. If you are both, please sign agree 'below'; if not, sign 'disagree'. Cheers, Daniel 05:28, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reconfirmation