Sam alen

title "Neo Nazi terrorists murders"

Hi, just added some thoughts about the title on the talk page there. Maybe you might find it usefull and informative. Don't know. I didn't mean to criticize in any way. Best regards. -- 46.115.18.68 (talk) 06:39, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for your kind reply. - I just wanted to share some information and don't know how to name the thing. I'm living in Germany and am closely following all the details about the affair and it's aftermath. - Being no native speaker of English, I don't know how to make it into a title. I would suggest you might perhaps make a formal request for move. There are some Wikipedia procedures to be observed though. (I'm new to WP and don't know about this technical and formal buisiness.) - As for me I've had enough of it all, I won't register to WP, since ... well, have a look at Talk:Bosphorus serial murders#Arrogance & Impolite Behaviour. - Closing on a more pleasant note: I do share your intentions as I understand them and was pleased to have met you. Best regards. (46.115.18.68) -- 176.1.235.198 (talk) 15:46, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi, yes to my mind this title really fits it best! Good job. - I was pondering on it for quite some time too and thought it must be something like that. But could not find the English expression. (WP gives this definition: spree ... "Killing several people in succession over a fairly long yet uninterrupted period of time". - Previously I thought it were only used for amoks that happen in a short time span.) - There are most likely a lot more unsolved crimes for which they are responsible, e.g. the bomb in Cologne (see National Socialist Underground). Besides the lives lost, all the other victims that were seriously wounded should be mentioned also. - Terrorists is what they are and can not be disputed under the guise of NPOV by any standards of decency or reason, ... but it seems there is somebody on the loose who even dares to do exactly that. (Unbelievable as it is.) - Since I'm not registered to WP (and I told you why) my contributions may appear with different IPs. Therefore I'm looking forward to your answer on your talk page here. - Warm regards (176.1.235.198) -- 176.1.7.158 (talk) 21:24, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Just to follow up on the usage of the term "spree" (about which I was not so sure) here is a valuable reference quote from a first grade source proving it's absolutely correct in every aspect:

"BERLIN (Reuters) - The head of Germany's domestic intelligence service resigned on Monday after admitting that his agency had shredded files on a neo-Nazi cell whose killing spree targeting immigrants rocked the country late last year."

Source: from Reuters news agency, Mon Jul 2, 2012 8:40am EDT http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/02/us-germany-neonazis-idUSBRE8610ME20120702

Hope it's usefull. Bye (176.1.235.198) -- 46.115.36.239 (talk) 00:30, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

thank you. i will look some more sources thanks (176.1.235.198)

Hi Sam alen, here is another quote for the usage of the term "spree":

"Warning from Former Extremist Neo-Nazi Terrorist: Threat Remains Real" - By David Crossland

"As Germany prepares to commemorate the 10 victims of the killing spree committed by the NSU neo-Nazi group, a former extremist has warned that more potential terrorists are lurking in the far-right scene, which he claims is well-organized and ready to resort to bombing attacks in its goal of creating a 'Fourth Reich'."

Source: from SPIEGEL ONLINE, 02 February 2012

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/warning-from-former-extremist-neo-nazi-terrorist-threat-remains-real-a-816734.html

(If you want to read more articles from DER SPIEGEL on this topic you may find them here: http://www.spiegel.de/international/topic/neo_nazi_terror_cell/ - It's the topic page and is updated reguarly.)

User "Kintetsubuffalo" actually reverted all the last edits and the change of title. (Giving no reason besides repeating "meaningless" and contributing nothing at all (constructive or other) to the debate in the section Article title nor referring to it in anyway whatsoever. - And now he even unleashes quite a rant, calling me names ("sock or meatpuppet") and threatening "Next time I will bring in the admins" (as if they were at his commands). - Now, what a threat that is! (I mean, it's about time that he's been taken care of.) Just look at the strange "House Rules" he stipulates on his "Don't wish to talk page", as it should be named. Funny thing is though, his judgement about his behavioural problem seems to be quite intact so far, since his rant appears in the section Arrogance & Impolite Behaviour - which to my mind is all the more appropriate.

Another issue with him that I want to bring to your attention now is quite a telling one indeed!

In the WP article about Nazi human experimentation he added the tag "citation needed" to the well known and extensively proven fact that most of the victims were Jews. - This he did at 01:26, on 9 July 2012, and you can see it for yourself in the Revision history (via Tab "View history" on the upper right near the search box). Comparison of versions by marking the radio buttons (dots).

As for the underlying agenda and his political inclination see his own words. - That was my suspicion all along. - "Germanophiles" having a love affair with the most dreadful period of our past, I know them and I can tell them; and they are most certainly not the sort of friends we need nor that were welcome here in modern Germany by any means. (Remember him doubting "terrorism" under the guise of WP:Neutral Point of View?)

To my mind, all these obstinate edits were most certainly not made in good faith. - Cf. also the list "Signs of disruptive editing", and concerning his behaviour: "WP:Civility", "WP:No personal attacks", "WP:Please do not bite the newcomers" (for which he's already been admonished) and so on. - There is something even more unpleasant: constantly making his derogatory remarks in the edit summaries, which are there to stick and can only be seen in the relevant Revision History pages. (As he did long before, seems a constant habit.) - After all, may the Admins now clear up the mess, it's about time.

Almost forgot: There was somebody with the moniker "Thelastnasdaq" who tinkered with your signature and mine on the talk page of the article (deleting the link to the list of user contributions). He's registered only very recently (01:35, 16 July 2012) and has only done these two illegal edits. (That's serious misconduct.) They were promptly spotted as vandalism and reverted by another user. - Any idea what this was? My first guess is, there might be someone concocting some bogus-evidence to stage a smear of reputation later.

As for me, I'm through now with Wikipedia. Enough is enough! It's all just a waste of time and effort. - On the other hand it really was kind of educational, to see myself what goes into the English Wikipedia, what not and what are the issues behind it all. - Wikipedia definitely cannot be considered a reliable source of reference at all. - Well, I've always got my DVD-version of the good old Britannica handy to turn to. And for current events I visit the websites of the BBC and the premium newspapers if need be.

Now it's time to say Goodbye, dear friend. - This here now are the very final lines I send to WP. But of course I will look for your contributions from time to time. - May God bless you and your friends and family, and may He be with you always! (176.1.235.198) -- 46.115.35.59 (talk) 06:36, 18 July 2012 (UTC)