Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User conduct

Comments about individual users

This section is for discussing specific users who have violated Wikipedia policies and guidelines. In order to request comments on a user's actions, follow the instructions to create a subpage in the section below. Disputes over the writing of articles, including disputes over how best to follow the NPOV policy, belong in the Article content disputes section above.

Deleting uncertified user RfCs

Requests for comment which do not meet the minimum requirements 48 hours after creation are considered "uncertified" and will be de-listed. See Wikipedia:Requests for comment#User-conduct RfC for the minimum requirements. The subject RFC page will also be deleted, unless the subject has explicitly requested it to be retained.

Archives

Old discussions are kept in Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User conduct disputes archive.

General user conduct

Discussions about user conduct should be listed in this section unless the complaint is specifically about the use of admin privileges or the choice of username. To list a user conduct dispute, please create a subpage using Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Example user as a template, and then list it as follows:

Example user

{one or two short sentences giving the dry facts} ~~~~~ (note: that is five tildes, not four, RFCs are signed with the date only, not your username)

Candidate pages - still need to meet the two person threshold

List newer entries on top

Teemu Ruskeepää

User:Teemu Ruskeepää Has been continually attempting to restructure the talk page of Fidel Castro, and is now adding a lengthy poll to the foot of each talk discussion, despite many comments that he does not have consensus. Furthermore, responses to the many other users who object to this have become increasingly uncivil and accusatory. 10:25, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Approved pages - have met the two person threshold

List newer entries on top

JD_UK

JD_UK argues about any changes I make to any articles. I have heard that he doesn't accept things, even though he admits they're good, because I did it. He constantly argues all the time with me, and it's causing unneeded wikistress. He has often demanded I stay off his talkpage, and made personal attacks towards me.

BenH

User:BenH never answers messages on talk page, and continually edits TV station articles while being told to stop. 00:58, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Michaellovesnyc

User:Michaellovesnyc has been violating multiple Wikipedia policies in his attempt to push his point of view, primarily on Mail-order bride. 22:51, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Irpen

Irpen has been engaging in removing repeatedly a dispute tag altough the dispute was not settled. He refused to follow WP:DR, misinterpreted WP:Consensus, was adding misleading edit summaries and comments.--05:46, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Imacomp

Imacomp has been engaging in uncivil behavior, including blatantly misleading edit summaries, repeated personal attacks, edit warring, and blanket reverts of edits to edits made by editors that he "trusts". 16:29, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Brya

User:Brya has made a series of controversial edits to pages in biology (specifically botany), reverting changes made. Discussion and informal mediation has been attempted on his talk.09:23, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Mines45

Mines45 has repeatedly made controversial edits to a small number of pages, and has continually reinstated these edits in the face of factual evidence to the contrary. In over seven months of editing, he/she has yet to use a single edit summary, or respond to a single discussion page posting. In fact, all posts made on Mines45's talk page are quickly removed. In addition, he/she has made two personal attacks on a Wikipedia administrator. 19:59, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Frater FiatLux

A member of Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn (Rosicrucian Order of A+O), this user came to Wikipedia to intentionally wage a propaganda battle against all other Golden Dawn orders. He has done this through edit warring, revert warring, recruitment of meatpuppets to support him in revert warring, and continued edit warring after signing an agreement to mediation. He has exhausted the patience of all other editors of the articles he has been attacking. This is a requeset for a community ban. 17:26, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Michael D. Wolok

Allegations against Wolok of continually disregards content policies, behavior policies, engages in spamming campaigns, exhausts community patience 14:19, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Der alte Hexenmeister

POV pushing, uncivil behavior, vandalism 01:02, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

maddyfan

Edit warred the Christina Aguilera article causing it to be protected, incivility, personal attacks and sockpuppetry. 22:49, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Vivaldi

Restarted after certification. Less than honest edit summaries, removal of criticism, and other POV edits. 02:53, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Swainstonation

Uncivil behavior on own and others' talk pages. 05:16, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Zer0faults

Removes complaints from his talk page, personally attacks other users, ignores NPOV, countless reverts, even corrected typos, and endless innuendo on talk pages 02:58, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Dr1819

Incivility and personal attacks centered on men's fashion articles 01:24, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Hatto

Extremely uncooperative user; vandalism, reverts, copywrite problems, non-communication, disruption, edit warring, NPOV, disregard for policy, more. 03:26, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Rick Norwood

Consistent addition of loaded and POV paragraphs and sections in the Conservatism article. 15:00, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Ericsaindon2

A single-topic editor engaged in violating NOR, SOCK, POINT, 3RR, OWN, CONSENSUS, SOAPBOX, etc. 08:22, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Iloveminun

Harassment, sockpuppetry and copyright vio. 18:48, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Aquirata

POINT, WP:V, trolling talking pages. 09:10, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Tony Sidaway (3)

Discussion with regards to the editing of user signatures 05:07, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Ed Poor (2)

Edit warring, disruption, tendentious editing. 20:40, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

-Barry-

User has brought long-standing external disputes to Perl article, and removed that article from the Good Articles list. Refusal to compromise in mediation has lead to RfC. 18:40, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

SNIyer12

User constantly adds innacurate/unsourced information to articles and ignores requests that s/he stop. 00:50, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Pansophia

Edit warring and using WP to attack Kaiser Permanente in pursuit of a personal grievance. 00:23, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Brian G. Crawford

Bad faith nomintions at AfD, personal attacks, template misuse, assuming bad faith, and incivility. -- 17:01, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

CoolKatt number 99999

Incivility. 21:02, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Irgendwer

Incivility and edit warring. 04:53, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Gene Nygaard

Persistently imposes his own style preferences on scientific articles, and is constantly uncivil in his dealings with other users. Inadvertently forgot to list this here, so although two people have certified it already I thought I'd better put it here for now. 23:27, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Futureobservatory

Possible viololation of copyright, and doesn't answer on talk pages when challenged, but keeps on copying material. 04:13, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Hurricane Devon

Incivility, edit warring, copyvios, attacking other users. 02:04, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Kven users RfC

Consistant POV-pushing since November 2005 in regards to articles related to the Kvens (a historical Scandinavian tribe). 20:15, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Zarbon

Edit warring, 3RR violations, sock puppetry, copyvios, and has made it clear he has no intention of stopping no matter how many times he is blocked. 04:46, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Pat8722

Revert warring against consensus at Libertarianism, staying just within the limits of the 3 revert rule. 14:34, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Use of administrator privileges

This section is only for discussions specifically related to the use of sysop rights by Wikipedia:Administrators. This includes the actions of protecting or unprotecting pages, deleting or undeleting pages, and blocking or unblocking users. If the dispute is over an admin's actions as an editor, it should be listed under the General user conduct section above. To list a dispute, create a subpage using the following sample as a template:

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Example admin

Allegations: {one or two short sentences giving the dry facts} ~~~~~

As with disputes over general user conduct, at least two people must certify that they believe there is a legitimate basis for the complaint. If the listing is not certified within 48 hours of listing, it will be deleted.

Candidate pages - still need to meet the two person threshold
List newer entries on top

Approved pages - have met the two person threshold
List newer entries on top

MONGO

Abuse of admin rules in blocking users when involved in a content dispute with them and without providing a clear motivation supported by the policy.

Lupo

Abuse of admin rules in ruling and POV of Soviet pre-1973 images.