Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Abtract

---

• Abtract (talk · contribs · logs)

---

Users should only edit one summary or view, other than to endorse.

Statement of the dispute

This is a summary written by users who are concerned by this user's conduct. Only users who certify this request should edit the "Statement of the dispute" section.

Cause of concern

Abtract seems to engage in both slow and rapid edit warring regularly on multiple articles, often related, skirting the 3RR policy while continuing refusal to desist and discuss. Numerous warnings left, but only one block[1] at this time due primarily to being given chances to correct and pages being protected instead. He seems to be gaming the system with his stopping early to avoid a block. Recent examples:

1. Hp 1, 2, 3 4 - slow edit war
2. HP 1, 2 - stopped after warning
3. HP (disambiguation) 1, 2- only two before article protected
4. Bleach (disambiguation)
5. Bleach 1, 2, 3 - warned and stopped
6. Bleach (manga) 1, 2, 3 - warned and stopped
7. YuYu Hakusho 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

3RR warnings he's received from multiple editors since December (both regular and templated): [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18]

And two 3RR reports filed: 10 April 2008 (no violation though several commented that he should be blocked), 20 May 2008 (Warned) (said warning).

He has also shown incivility against other editors, particularly User:Sesshomaru with accusations of stalking[19] [20] [21], referring to him as "the single most awkward, boring and up yourself editor that it has been my displeasure to meet in my time on wp"[22], and has called him a maniac in a {{help me}}[23]. An AN/I was filed Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive391#Complete rudeness from User:Abtract in which Abstract said he would not make insults anymore. He has made what appears to be an attack page [24] against Sesshomaru, though he may possibly consider it a potential RfC of his own if the footer is a possible indicator.

Has told other editors to "stop badgering him" when they asked him to respect an arbitration in progress[25], has been warned about his "snarky edit summaries" [26] (in reference to several edit summaries here), and told an admin who was trying to correct him to "grow up and act like an admin"[27]. When warned about civility, he responded with "intriguing; do you have an incivility meter?"[28]. He's falsely edit warred by calling undoing of his disruptions as vandalism.[29][30][31].

Several editors, including User:LessHeard vanU (who attempted arbitration), User:Redrocket, User:Collectonian, User:Paul Erik, and User:Arcayne have tried to talk to him, explain how he is being disruptive and violating policies and guidelines, and offer corrective advice. He generally responds to warnings with brush offs, flippancy or sarcasm, and "thanks for stopping by" comments. [32] [33] [34] [35] [36] [37] [38] [39] [40] [41] [42]

This is the second RfC against Abtract, with the first being deleted for uncertified within the necessary time. Since that RfC, Abtract created an "alter-ego" User:Abstract. He has not used it to perform any edits yet, but curious as to why it was done at all.

Added 00:11, 21 May 2008 (UTC): Abtract basically has admitted to "wikistalking" here [43] and continues to edit war after the filing of this RfC in his. I undid an undiscussed and WP:NPOV change to WP:RS. Abtract followed behind me and began reverting it repeatedly to goad an edit war and try to get me blocked.(1st revert, 2nd revert, 3rd revert) He followed this with a retaliatory 3RR report [44], for which he was blocked 24 hours for gaming the system [45].

Added 04:40, 21 May 2008 (UTC): Abtract appears to be keeping an attack piece on Sesshomaru in his user space at[46]. Initially, I declined to mention it when I found it while starting this RfC as I first though he might be planning his own RfC, however in looking at the history, I see he started this page back on March 28th, making me question its actual use. He only added the RfC stuff at the bottom after I first suggested an RfC be filed against him (with the first one filed near the same time).

Applicable policies and guidelines

List the policies and guidelines that apply to the disputed conduct.

1. WP:3RR
2. WP:EDITWAR
3. WP:CIVILITY
4. WP:NPA
5. WP:AGF
6. WP:EQ
7. WP:GAME

Desired outcome

Abtract to receive an appropriate block for his most receive behaviors. For him to agree to to avoid any and all edit warring in the future, stop being disruptive, and be required to use talk page discussions to settle disputes. For him to agree not revert anything other than true vandalism more than once before engaging in discussion, and this one-revert limit to be enforceable with a block. Abtract to cease all accusations of stalking and insults against User:Sesshomaru, and to avoid anymore contact with or interactions with as much as possible. Abtract to stop being flippant with other editors, including him to stop ignoring warnings and corrections he is given. If felt helpful, Abtract agreeing to mentoring.

Users certifying the basis for this dispute

Users who tried and failed to resolve the dispute.

1. -- [[::User:Collectonian|Collectonian]] ([[::User talk:Collectonian|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Collectonian|contribs]]) 19:56, 20 May 2008 (UTC) [47] [48] [49] [50]
2. Arcayne (talk · contribs) - I, too have had more than a few difficulties with this editor, and am frankly surprised that this demeanor hasn't softened over time. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 23:24, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
3. LessHeard vanU (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) here and here. LessHeard vanU (talk) 14:03, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

---

Additional users endorsing this cause for concern.

1. Sesshomaru (talk · contribs) - this editor has a bad case of incivility all around (especially with me) and appears to harass for the sake of it, usually by performing an edit page to a page I or Collectonian have just edited (such as at Gary Oak and Wikipedia:Reliable sources). Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 00:28, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Questions

Any users may post questions in this section.  Answers should be reserved for those certifying the dispute.

Q.

A.

Q.

A.

Response

{This is a summary written by the user whose conduct is disputed.  Users not named in the request or certifying the request should post under Additional views below.}

Response to concerns

Abtract (talk · contribs) I object strongly to Collectonian starting this action and stating that she has tried to help resolve the dispute. The first of these supposed "helps" was just a warning (not very helpful to an editor known to be a little touchy atm). The second was a completely unjustified warning which she must eventually have twigged to be so but just went on and on - also not very helpful to say the least - I used the word "bitch" in an edit summary concerning the page Bitch (disambiguation). The last two "helps" were also warnings ... are warnings counted as "help"? I doubt it. IMHO she has not attempted to help in any way, she has simply taken sides, therefore she cannot be counted as one of the "two editors who have tried and failed to resolve the dispute".

It is not clear to me what "the dispute" actually is apart from an overenthusiastic use of the revert tool - in common with Sess, JHJ, Arcayne and indeed Collectonian to name but a few (it takes two to tango) - and that I accused Sess of stalking, By "stalking" I mean that he checks on my contributions and edits where I have just been - this he readily admits - and which has continued. In addition I made a somewhat injudicious set of personal remarks about Sess some time ago, for which I am genuinely sorry (cos I guess he is probably a good guy) and have apologised - indeed I have attempted three times to make the peace with him and each time my offers have been rejected, woe is me. As you will know, I have just been blocked for 24 hours which genuinely puzzles me; I reverted three times in a content dispute, Collectonian reverted four times, yet I was found guilty of edit warring and Coll was not even warned by the admin concerned. Somehow I was at fault for cunningly goading her into an edit war ... wow, I should be so clever.

I am not going to answer point by point all the rather petty accusations above, I simply ask you to look at them as a whole and ask yourself "Is Abtract any more guilty than Sess or Collectonian?" Look particularly at points 32 through 42 above to see the quality of the accusations - I stand by all those edits. Another hint; when looking at Sess's talk page to discover what kind of person he is, bear in mind that he has removed all comments he doesn't like (there have been many) so you will have to trawl through the history.

User:JHunterJ makes a sensible suggestion which I positively welcome and would happily comply with provided Collectonian is included, provided Collectonia and Sess are not allowed to act as a pair (I think you can see how unfair that would be, and provided all parties agree. It is very close to an offer I made to Sess some time ago but which he rejected then, so I am not very hopeful.

Unless anyone has specific questions, I'm afraid I haven't kept as good a log as Collectonian (probably a good job I didn't or it would have been called (quoting from above) "an attack piece on Sesshomaru in his user space at[51]", so that's all I have to say.

Good luck with your considerations. Abtract (talk) 09:31, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Applicable policies and guidelines

List the policies and guidelines that apply to the response.

Questions

Any users may post questions in this section.  Answers should be reserved for the user named in the dispute.

Q.

A.

Q.

A.

Additional views

This is a summary written by users not directly involved with the dispute but who would like to add an outside view of the dispute.

{Enter summary here.}

Users who endorse this summary:

Proposed solutions

This section is for all users to propose solutions to resolve this dispute.  This section is not a vote and resolutions are not binding except as agreed to by involved parties.  

Template

1) Abtract, Sesshomaru, and JHunterJ agree to a 1RR policy with respect to the others, and agree to take it up on the Talk page if reverted themselves. See WP:1RR, WP:BRD -- JHunterJ (talk) 00:23, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Comment by parties:

I guess I should have responded here rather than above. This is a sensible suggestion which I positively welcome and would happily comply with provided Collectonian is included, provided Coll and Sess are not allowed to act as a pair (I think you can see how unfair that would be, and provided all parties agree. It is very close to an offer I made to Sess some time ago but which he rejected then, so I am not very hopeful.

Comment by others:

Template

2)

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Template

3)

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Discussion

All signed comments and talk not related to an endorsement should be directed to this page's discussion page. Discussion should not be added below. Discussion should be posted on the talk page. Threaded replies to another user's vote, endorsement, evidence, response, or comment should be posted to the talk page.