Wikipedia:Requests for comment/JzG 3

In order to remain listed at Wikipedia:Requests for comment, at least two people need to show that they tried to resolve a dispute with this sysop and have failed. This must involve the same dispute, not different disputes. The persons complaining must provide evidence of their efforts, and each of them must certify it by signing this page with ~~~~. If this does not happen within 48 hours of the creation of this dispute page (which was: {insert UTC timestamp with ~~~~~}), the page will be deleted. The current date and time is: 05:37, 15 September 2024 (UTC).

---

• JzG (talk · contribs · logs)

---

Statement of the dispute

JzG has used administrative tools with respect to articles with which he was involved, and with respect to editors with whom he was in dispute. JzG has ignored or rejected comments and requests regarding this, and has denied improper use of tools.

This RfC is filed solely to address the issue of use of tools while involved, and, for this purpose, it is not necessary to determine that the involvement was itself improper; examples of incivility and tendentious editing will be raised solely to show the depth of involvement, and thus the serious impropriety of use of tools while involved, not to propose sanctions or remedies for such ordinary editorial behavior.

Desired outcome

JzG assures the community that he recognizes the impropriety of his actions, and that such actions will not be repeated, and he himself reverses, or consents to the reversal of any of these actions, still standing in effect, by any other administrator, and apologizes to affected editors. Alternatively, he resigns his administrative privilege or it is removed by further process.

Description

User:JzG was long involved with Cold fusion and related articles. His first edit to Cold fusion was:

• 11:54, 13 July 2006 (Someone does not understand what "evenly split" means. A 2/3 majority against is not "evenly split".)[1]

This edit was reverted by Pcarbonn correcting JzG's misunderstanding.[2]

JzG went on to make a total of 64 edits to Cold fusion, through January 30, 2009. Complete list: User:Abd/JzG#64 Edits by JzG to Cold fusion.

His first edit to Talk:Cold fusion was:

• 17:22, 10 January 2006 (Wow, is this ever a blast from the past!)[17:22, 10 January 2006]

JzG went on to make a total of 140 edits to Talk:Cold fusion, through January 30, 2009. Complete list: User:Abd/JzG#Edits_by_JzG_to_Talk:Cold_fusion.

Many of these edits were contentious or uncivil or betrayed clear POV attachment. For example:

• You need to butt out. Advocating links to your own website is considered a form of spamming. You don't seem to do much other than that at present. Incidentally, my friend who worked with Fleischmann is a world class expert on electrochemistry with a publicaiton list as long as your arm, an endowed chair at a British university, a worldwide lecture schedule and a standard undergraduate text to his name. And he thinks it's not fusion. And he wrote one of the control systems for one of Fleischmann's original experiments. Beware the appeal to authority. Guy (Help!) 23:36, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

[This was in response to Jed Rothwell, a writer who has for many years specialized in low-energy nuclear reactions ("cold fusion"), and who is the "librarian" of lenr-canr.org. He signs IP edits with his name and title, not a link. He is COI and, complying with guidelines on that, after 2006, voluntarily confined himself to editing Talk pages.]

Powers misused

• Protection (log):

1. Talk:Cold fusion
   1. 20:28, 30 January 2009 ... (expires 20:28, 30 July 2009 )... (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration&oldid=267447809) [for specific explanation, see Statement by JzG]
   2. 00:06, 12 December 2007 ... (expires 00:06, January 12, 2008 ) ... (Spamming and abuse from website owner) [Jed Rothwell]
2. 14:51, 1 January 2008 Condensed matter nuclear science (POV fork used to get round article proteciton) [Indef full protection. CMNS is the general scientific field name covering cold fusion. JzG restored merge by ScienceApologist, then protected]
3. 12:16, 1 January 2008 Cold fusion research (POV fork used to evade article protection, not really on.) [Indef full protection]
4. 20:21, 6 December 2007 Cold fusion (expires 20:21, January 6, 2008 (UTC) ‎(Anon threastens to continue POV-pushing)

• Deletion (log):

1. Talk:Condensed matter nuclear science

Most deletions may be uncontroversial (but still improper because of involvement). However, this recent one was abusive, as can be seen from the restored Talk page. Merges may be undone later and Talk should remain. When this was restored, JzG moved the page to Talk:Condensed matter nuclear science/Archive, edit summaries (Archiving the twaddle) and (archived rampant POV-pushing.)

1. Talk:Cold fusion/wip
2. User talk:ObsidianOrder/Cold fusion
3. User:ObsidianOrder/Cold fusion
4. Talk:Cold fusion/tmp
5. User:CMNS This was a registered user, apparently, all contributions have been deleted.

• Blocking (log):

1. Special:Contributions/68.219.198.240 Jed Rothwell (signs)
2. Special:Contributions/208.89.102.50 Jed Rothwell (signs)
3. Special:Contributions/69.228.220.30 not Jed Rothwell, but JzG claims it is.
4. Special:Contributions/69.228.207.247 not Jed Rothwell, but JzG claims it is.
5. Special:Contributions/68.158.255.197 Jed Rothwell (signs)

• Protected pages edited

1. (list page or pages edited while protected)

Applicable policies

• Protection policy

1. Pages that are protected because of content disputes should not be edited except to make changes unrelated to the dispute or to make changes for which there is clear consensus. WP:PREFER
2. Administrators should not protect or unprotect a page to further their own position in a content dispute. WP:PREFER

• Deletion policy

1. {explain violation of deletion policy here}

• Blocking policy

1. Administrators must not block users with whom they are engaged in a content dispute; instead, they should report the problem to other administrators. Administrators should also be aware of potential conflicts of interest involving pages or subject areas with which they are involved. Blocking_policy#Conflicts_of_interest

Evidence of trying and failing to resolve the dispute

(Provide diffs. Links to entire articles aren't helpful unless the editor created the entire article. Edit histories also aren't helpful as they change as new edits are performed.)

Users certifying the basis for this dispute

{Users who tried and failed to resolve the dispute}

Response

This is a summary written by the sysop whose actions are disputed, or by other users who think that the dispute is unjustified and that the sysop's actions did not violate policy. Users who edit or endorse this summary should not edit the other summaries.

{Add summary here, but you must use the endorsement section below to sign.}

Users who endorse this summary:

Outside view

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. Users who edit or endorse this summary should not edit the other summaries.

{Add summary here, but you must use the endorsement section below to sign.}

Users who endorse this summary:

Outside view by

Users who endorse this summary:

Outside view by

Users who endorse this summary:

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.