Biography of Dmitry Rozhkov

On his personal page on the Russian Wikipedia, he reports the following information about himself: he lives in Moscow. Bauman, having received the qualifications of an engineer. Programs on Delphi. He is interested in science, history and decryption of writing, cosmos, literature, cinema, science fiction. He listens to rock. He created more articles including lists and dizambigs, mainly about the field of culture of stories, songs, writers, artists, etc.

was noted by articles: the matter in the cap - about the critical documentary about the mayor of Moscow Luzhkov, shown during the period of a massive anti -Luzhkovsky campaign on Russian television. Explosions in the Moscow metro - about a series of terrorist attacks in the Moscow metro in March. Olshansky landing - about the landing operation of Soviet troops during the Great Patriotic War.

It is one of the two main authors of the Skryabin article, Julian Aleksandrovich - about the young Russian composer Julian Skryabin. The article was written in an unusual style for Russian Wikipedia, in which articles are usually written in the extremely “dry” language. A sharp conflict broke out around this article. Participates in the projects “Selected Articles”, “Good Articles”, “Non -academic research”.

Without false modesty, he positions himself on Russian Wikipedia as a participant "with a large [7] contribution." In May, he became a participant in the conflict, between the Betsi Jane participant, who worked on arts about art and Zimin with his sponsored Lavrentia, who also specializes in art history articles [13] For more details, see the Dmitry Rozhkov position and his belonging to any large group in Wikipedia up to a year up to a year.

In connection with Rozhkov’s participation in AK-9, some tended to consider him “random” there.

After arriving in AK, its confrontation was clearly designated with the guards of the borders. Appendings for following moral standards. He called the scammer of the Evgen2 participant who wrote a letter criticizing the KV75 to the Memorial website, where KV75 worked. The cause of such a miracle is the factor of “neutrals” that vote spontaneously and the factor of mass support of Rozhkov in the last, most important days of voting.

Dmitry Rozhkov was one of the first to agree to participate in the AK elections where is the analytical thinking that KV75 wrote about if the minimum consequences of the proposed measures were not analyzed? In addition, in my sad experience, the participant is inclined to transfer the opponent in the case of the opponent’s personality, which categorically contradicts, as it seems to me, what is required of the arbiter.

I will vote against. Pessimist, November 11, UTC during the arbitrators voting was alternating success: in the first hours the neutral participant supported the fact that he took seventh place and qualified to obtain the status of a reserve arbitrator. However, by the end of the first day, Rozhkov was failed by the forces of the party of operators, which Rozhkov’s program statement was not to his liking.

Simultaneously with the successes of Dmitry, another candidate, Voyagger SED, loses support and generally leaves the elections in the middle of the seventh day of voting, giving Rozhkov the fourth place. Resisted by this fact, the participants who attribute to the members of the “party of operators” and its allies begin to change their votes from “for” to “against” or vote against Rozhkov, while taking opposite actions to the voyage.

The rationale for the "operators" in this case is "they say de candidate is non -cheeky." Almost the entire composition of the “Party of Operators” and their slander - according to various estimates, from 20 to 30 active participants in the Russian Wikipedia, participated in this chat, a significant part of which are administrators, former arbitrators, checking. So that we are not mistakenly suspected of honest people like Yaroslav.

It is easier to name those who are not there. Of course, all the participants in the chat do not consider their activities to be reprehensible or harmful, but adhere to the exact opposite point of view. This is strictly, speaking, not a secret society, but such a permanent wikivrech for their own. Although the chat participants do not like to spread about it up to direct denial, probably believing that they will “not understand” them in the community.

For a full list, it is better to contact the one in this chat participate. Rozhkov did not object to this list, but noticed that this was not the latest data. In revenge for filing a lawsuit, Scorpio was subjected to multiple personal attacks by Skypocrats. After some time, Rozhkov came to the rescue of Scorpio, confirming the accusations of Scorpio and emphasizing their seriousness.

Rozhkov also said that his colleagues in the AK-9 Ilya Voyager, Blacklake and Claymore did not reveal the obvious conflict of interests when discussing a canvassing of Rombica, which seriously affected the decision-making process. Rozhkov also revealed a case in which the Skypocrats conducted a provocation against him during the arbitration election campaign. MSTISLAVL spoke of Skypochas: “In fact, we never hid its presence, simply did not advertise.” That's exactly what was hidden.In the discussion of the application, Rozhkov acknowledged that the creation of blankets of Pipedic circles leads to conflicts, and after a while he opened the approximate composition of the participants.

Rozhkov described his investigation in this way: [20] about the existence of a large closed chat, in which the activists of our section take part in the spring of this year, it seems, in May, more precisely, I can’t remember now. The information was the most common, the evidence was not provided to me. On the one hand, I took this information with a fair amount of distrust, on the other, realizing that there is no smoke without fire, and that it would not exist that coordination between some administrators, and other regulars of the Vikivrech, I would naive that the group probably still exists, but its size, the degree of closed, selection of members and influence on the project are greatly exaggerated.

I asked at random about several administrators who came to mind, including some AK-9 arbitrators, whether they are in this group. With regard to some, my guesses were true, there are no others in relation to others, in one or two cases my informant, as it later became clear, was mistaken, reproducing information from memory. According to the decision, the warnings were distributed to some participants, the confirmation of the flag of the bureaucrat Winda was appointed, and the bug was sent to the vichemia while he was preserved by the flag so that he continued to work in the Armenian-Azerbaijani mediation group.

During the discussion, I received a number of positive reviews, for example: a magnificent candidate. Brave, honest, independent, with reasonable judgments, with a clear understanding of the goals of the project and rules, gives the most accurate characteristics to other participants. Thanks to Dmitry for what he did for our project. Rozhkov replied that administration would distract him from articles and that much has not yet been done.

Dmitry also said that he was not a completely conflict participant, and therefore many will probably vote against him [27]. Rozhkov also offered to run for administrators and Russian Nature, who became famous for submitting applications for various statuses. During the vote, a number of participants subjected Rozhkov sharply criticism related to his activities in AK in particular, criticism caused a decision to publish and consideration of the application submitted by the newcomer Ilya Volgin.

In total, 39 participants voted against Zasa Rozhkova, including 12 ex-arbitrators. After assigning the flag of the administrator, a certain anonymous from the Kazan IP handed him an automatic machine “Weapons for the shooting of frantic dogs”, but no one handed the broom. He proposed to send both administrators to the confirmation. Both claims met a sharply negative reaction from OG.

Less than half a day after filing a lawsuit against Rozhkov himself, a lawsuit was filed in which the applicant Grebenkov accused Rozhkov of ethics and demanded to introduce progressing and consider the possibility of removing the administrator. In response, Rozhkov wrote a prostrate comment, explaining in detail the charges against him, and in turn demanding to send Grebenkov to forced confirmation for ethics in the text of the lawsuit.

But taking into account the fact that he blocked me and, despite the two decisions of the AK, did not recognize the incorrect blocking, I was very concerned about the candidate’s statement, that the main thing in blocking is a term, not its fact, that is, when I was assigning the Fred flag and all the others, I can quite expect impulsive locks for which the flag was removed. In addition, I Call Me Old-Fashioned believe that the administrator should not be systematically rude, examples of which are given in many in this discussion.

The blocking was absolutely true. And everyone understands this. Even those who signed the decision on the opposite. In fact, she was true. And if you were regretted once again, you do not need to try to imagine that you were justified. These are completely different things. And your giving about the systematic rudeness for which you, by and large, were blocked, would be funny if it were not so cynical.

I understand that your bad reputation is nowhere to spoil further, but find the strength to apologize to Victoria at least out of respect for yourself. Stanley K. Dish, August 22 UTC Once I already spent 12 hours on the collection of diplomas, specially so that I could not be reproached for unfounded. Need a link? Please: Ak thought she was well known. This time Rozhkov simplified everything, announcing Victoria’s arbitrator’s discharge “naturally, it is also necessary to divert the Victoria arbiter, with respect to which he“ difficult ”[35] voted“ for ”[36] in AK elections 2 and a half hours after filing, the application was satisfied with the Obsachse bureaucrat.

Was it a real reason or not? Upon coincidence, it was at the same time that the rule has already appeared on payment, which prohibits the administrator’s flag for those who receive money for adding material to Wikipedia. On the same day, Ghirlandajo carried it out for removal as insignificant.When discussing, Rozhkov pointed out that he considers Shechtman to be a figure of caliber Savchenko.

One of the striking examples was a vote against a participant in Kronas in his application to the flag of the summary. He was the first who was “against”, and all the other eight participants voted “for” [40]. The Argumentation of Rozhkov was: and the flags of various investigators and other “defenders of Wikipedia” are not needed, since equilibrium should be maintained - the word of such an investigator against the word of the opponent.

Without the weight of one of the parties with tools ... So, the struggle against advertisers, spamers, raiders with a total original lack of PDN in their address - for God's sake, only without flags. And still received status !!! Despite the affiliated mention of Athelled sources right in the preamble. And other articles associated with Alekperov about Zverev’s sister, Natalia Ivanovna, about the Fund for our future fund.

This is not some small manager. Alekperov can buy anyone. And to kill someone. This is a threat to the fundamental rules of Wikipedia. At least in Russia.