User talk:Rlevse

Retired

This user is no longer active on Wikipedia.

Who wanted this?

Some misunderstandings. Better discussed elsewhere.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
I am rather stunned that the edit adding the retired template indicated that your retirement was "wanted" by "you guys". I can speak only for myself, of course, but that is one of the last things I myself would ever think of "wanting". You have been a very capable and effective editor, adminsitrator, and arbitrator, and I am stunned that you had somehow gotten the impression that your retirement was "wanted". While every experienced editor here will have some detractors, I cannot believe that there was any particular groundswell of opinion that you should retire as an editor. Please reconsider. John Carter (talk) 15:38, 31 October 2010 (UTC) Whether content added by a long term, highly respected, capable, and above all, editor with great integrity, is non compliant should be a reasoned, intelligent discussion so that content can be fixed if needed, not an attack on the editor. That such an editor might feel frustration enough to retire when that isn't the case is understandable. I also think he has many many supporters, many more than he knows probably so, I hope for sake of those editors and the good of encyclopedia he will reconsider too. He's a great loss.(olive (talk) 16:02, 31 October 2010 (UTC)) I have some things I could add to this discussion, but overall I still have too much respect for Rlevse to do that here. Can we please take it elsewhere. Hans Adler 16:11, 31 October 2010 (UTC) For me its not a discussion of the editor. I support and trust the editor based on what I know of his history and that hasn't changed. Dealing with questioned content is an academic discussion when you're dealing with a trusted editor that should have been settled without the drama. History means something. I can't see that I have anything more to say, Rlevse's history speaks for itself, but for others whatever you need. And thanks for your sensibility. (olive (talk) 16:22, 31 October 2010 (UTC)) I really think that, based on the above comments from both of you, that further discussion of the questionable content would be better placed elsewhere. John Carter (talk) 16:46, 31 October 2010 (UTC) I refer to content under question by other editors, rather than content that I am questioning. If that clarifies. Please don't read anything more into what I'm saying. And I'm not discussing the content here, I'm outlining what started this all in the first place. Please fell free to duplicate my comments if useful.(olive (talk) 16:54, 31 October 2010 (UTC)) When plagiarism accusations are possible, revert to Yoda-grammar seems to be the lesson -- I suspect that some of those most for blood calling are suscpetible as well on similar, albeit not identical, phrasing charges. Yoda would be proud. Collect (talk) 17:52, 31 October 2010 (UTC) Who is calling for blood, and where? Malleus Fatuorum 18:20, 31 October 2010 (UTC) There seems to be a big plagiarism blood-feud going on right now and you just got swept up into it, Rlevse. Instead of other users taking this calmly and working to fix the problems, they are instead throwing around harmful words and calling for blocks left and right. It's a really sad thing. I hope you do come back sometime, Rlevse, maybe after waiting a month or two for this to calm down. The community really needs you. You are most definitely one of the shining stars on Wikipedia. SilverserenC 18:15, 31 October 2010 (UTC) To characterise this as a "blood-feud" is a serious misjudgement, particularly as this specific example appears to be a clear copyright violation. I leave it to others to investigate who inserted the copyrighted material, when, and why, but it is by no means a personal feud. Rather it should be an encouragement to all of us that we try to do better. Malleus Fatuorum 18:20, 31 October 2010 (UTC) If you say so. I've seen quite a few users saying that blocks should be doled out for all of this (not just for Rlevse, but a number of users who have been found to accidentally plagiarize some things) and very, very few people are actually focusing on trying to fix these issues. Talk is cheap on Wikipedia. Let's see some people actually go about fixing the articles. SilverserenC 18:25, 31 October 2010 (UTC) Other editors are trying to fix it, but you seem to be conspicuously absent among them. And let's face the facts; lesser editors are routinely blocked for copyright violations. I repeat, copyright violations, not plagiarism as you appear to be intent on calling this. Malleus Fatuorum 18:28, 31 October 2010 (UTC) Everyone else is calling it plagiarism, i'm just quoting them. And i'm not fixing things because I am going on a hiatus for a month in just a few hours and because I have homework to do today. Why are you in such an acerbic mood today? SilverserenC 18:34, 31 October 2010 (UTC) Please try to refrain from making personal comments. You can have no idea what kind of a mood I'm in, so don't project your own mood onto me. Malleus Fatuorum 18:42, 31 October 2010 (UTC) (ec) The problem is copyvio, not just plagiarism. At least Moonriddengirl, Uncle G and me seem to agree about this. And so far I have not seen a single editor ask for a block. Personally I would go so far as to propose that Rlevse should step back from Arbcom permanently to remove pressure while protecting the office – but no further. Theoretically an energetic arb could stay active and set an example to the community by dealing with the situation very constructively and proactively. But I doubt that Rlevse has the nerves of steel that this would require. Hans Adler 19:04, 31 October 2010 (UTC) Come on you two, surely you can work this out! :) It's not fair on Rlevse, especially as this is his talk page. Set Sail For The Seven Seas 282° 32' 15" NET 18:50, 31 October 2010 (UTC) I think we should just remove all of this back to my original comment and leave my original comment alone. :/ SilverserenC 18:56, 31 October 2010 (UTC) An uninformed comment always looks better without insightful responses. Too much detail is inappropriate on the talk page of someone who has made a fatal mistake and drawn the consequences, and I may actually have crossed the line with my last comment above. As I said in the beginning: This is not the right place for such a discussion. In my opinion it should be removed completely, and maybe continued at WP:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents/Plagiarism and copyright concerns on the main page. Hans Adler 19:08, 31 October 2010 (UTC) Well, I can't continue it. As I said above, i'm going on a month-long hiatus in just a few hours. SilverserenC 19:10, 31 October 2010 (UTC) Hans is right, this isn't the right place. Please continue on another talk page or at ANI. I kindly request this section either be removed or collapse archived. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 19:12, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Ferry Plantation House

The DYK project (nominate) 18:03, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

JJ

You have new messages

Hello, Rlevse. You have new messages at Chzz's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{user:chzz/tb}} template.    File:Ico specie.png

 Chzz  ►  18:13, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Don't Retire!

Aww, don't retire, I was just getting to know you. You're one of the best Wikipedians here. Don't take these little things to heart. You have to come back. Hope to hear from you soon. Set Sail For The Seven Seas 275° 36' 14" NET 18:22, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Posted at the request of Rlevse

Rlevse contacted me via email to ask me to post this:

Rlevse has turned in his advanced user permissions (CU/OS, ArbCom, etcetera), and has scrambled his passwords. - SirFozzie (talk) 18:46, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

I can confirm this as well as I have spoken to Rlevse. I think we should all give him some breathing room for awhile. People can come back after a long period of time, but I feel that Rlevse needs to have some room to breathe and spend sometime with WP:REALLIFE for awhile before coming back. I can bet he appreciates all the comments that are being posted, but let's let him be for the time being. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 18:50, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

True, but if he's scrambled his passwords, he's never coming back. Set Sail For The Seven Seas 288° 8' 45" NET 19:12, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

That's not clear at all. A lot of people have had contact with him through other channels than Wikipedia, and I am sure he can get his account back if he wants it, very likely with the admin bit. But I am also sure that starting again without any of the honours he has received from Wikipedia (and no doubt deserved) can be liberating. Hans Adler 19:21, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Good point! I forgot the email new password link. Either way it'll be great to see Rlevse back again! Set Sail For The Seven Seas 291° 43' 45" NET 19:26, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

I would have to admit that coming back under a different name would probably be extremely liberating to a lot of us. And he wouldn't be the first one to come back under a different name even after having been granted adminship. John Carter (talk) 19:51, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

No, he wouldn't... Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 20:47, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Several people including myself came back under new accounts after purging the password and disabling email, as long as email is still fuctioning, as it seems like it is, you could still edit from this account. Secret ^account 02:26, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

I was planning on coming back under a different name and editing lots of new articles. I would never have tried to circumvent any restrictions I just wanted a fresh start but checkusers started hammering with their banhammers, this pulled me back into the same old rut. At least Rlevse does not have these issues. Polargeo 2 (talk) 17:12, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Good luck

Hi Rlevse. Sorry to see it's turned out this way. Good luck in life, it'd always be nice to see you back. All the best, The Rambling Man (talk) 18:47, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi Rlevse, I feel the same. So the last of many things you did for me was placing a Bach-cantata among the Halloween hooks for DYK. I miss you, did you know? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:05, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi Rlevse, I didn't know you well, but I have long noticed and appreciated all the selfless effort and hard work that you have put into Wikipedia, especially DYK, and hope that you'll be able to come back some day. I'm proud to count myself as one of the last wikipedians to have been honoured by you with a day of my own -- you truly are an Awesome Wikipedian. BabelStone (talk) 20:25, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

I hope this turns out to be a (well earned) break, and not permanent. Regardless of things coming up, it's always been clear that you cared for the project and were one of the good guys.

I would support your getting any and all of the bits back if you return and want to come back to those activities. Trust in your judgement has never been an issue.

Take whatever time you need or want, see if you still think Wikipedia's something you want to help with, come back either as yourself or a new start if you want to keep going afterwards. In the meantime, I hope life out there is good to you.

Roux also sends along his positive regards and a hope that you'll be back as well.

Take care. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 21:05, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Agree with GWH on all points. John Carter (talk) 21:07, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

You will be missed. I appreciate your thoughtfulness and insight over the years. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 02:27, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Indeed, there are a lot of sentiments I could echo. This one is but one of the most appropriate ones. Jclemens (talk) 02:35, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

• The Rambling Man says it all. --Orlady (talk) 21:13, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

• Damn. Take a month-off around Chiang Mai, then get back back at it. Sincerely, Jack Merridew 18:27, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Just a thought

I won't suggest that I have even the beginning of an inkling of a clue as to what has gone on, but regardless of this straw that seemingly broke the camel's back, I think (as someone who has watched similar repeated things over and over with arbcom members) that a bit of stress and/or frustration in one place (like arbcom), can bleed over to others. It's a mostly thankless job, where, often for being conscientious or trying to "do the right thing", one finds themselves burned in effigy (and sometimes not even in effigy). It's unfair and I wish it was some other way.

My sincere hope is that this retirement eventually turns into a wikibreak, and that we'll see you soon.

Regardless, I wish you well. - jc37 19:43, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Hear, hear. You are thought of fondly and will be welcomed back should you choose to return. With best wishes, -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 23:20, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

It's a good point that many things in Wikipedia can become excessively stressful. We can all make mistakes and it really shouldn't be such a big deal, especially in an area where it's a question of degree or of differing views. Hope this is a helpful wikibreak for you, look forward in hope to your future contributions. . dave souza, talk 23:51, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Take it easy, it shows you have opinions unlike others who are always placid and coldly hat collecting and doing the bare mininum to trick the customers YellowMonkey (new photo poll) 01:56, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm in constant email coversation with Rlevse, I don't think he's coming back unfortunaly, he's clearly upset about this situation. Secret ^account 23:53, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

I can understand that. The issue which caused this brouhaha is itself one of the less well-defined matters here. Secret, if you can contact Rlevse, please let him know that, if nothing else, if the issue at hand does become the focus of some considerable attention with the intention of addressing the problem, as I hope it does very soon, I think his input in some form would be very much welcome. John Carter (talk) 23:59, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm glad that you found a job for R. to do on his return, John. I really hope he takes you up on your offer. I counted R. among my friends on wiki. My purpose in writing this is to wish him the best on whatever he chooses to do. R., thank you for your help and kindness on so many occasions. I hope you return. Take care and my best wishes to you. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 00:17, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Re John. Rlevse is looking at all the comments, including his talk page, AN/I and all the subpages, with all the drama that was caused from this. Secret ^account 17:48, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

And maybe a hint for a wider perspective:

The perspective from the top makes everything else look small. (With or without ouzo). Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 00:28, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm confused, what perspective exactly is he hoping Wikipedians will take? He manufactured articles at an amazing rate of knotts, obtained numerous admirers as a result and now it seems his secret of speedy writing has been solved. He allowed shit to be thrown at others for discovering the depths of his copy violations and now he wants a wider perspective - I bet he does.  Giacomo  18:38, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Giano, I hope you are not looking for an answer from me for the perspective of Wikipedians regarding R. on this convoluted and convulsive affair. It is simply not my department to speak on their behalf. I only suggested this to R. as personal advice that he should not take this incident too heavily and that there are other things and places in life, beautiful and uplifting, which could change the bleak perspective of the local affair. I gave him a nice example of such a place and I went on my way. R. never indicated that he wanted a wider perspective either. So I think that your comment that R. wants a wider perspective is off the mark. He never said that he did. Also R. helped me in the past, ironically for the same type of faux-pas as you made today. Editing while logged-out. He was a friend, and I tried to help him in an hour of need. I know that you don't want to turn this gesture into football. Political ot otherwise. I also know that you have the elegance to understand that when someone is gone, to let them be gone. It serves no purpose to criticise them personally for their faults. We can learn from their faults so as not to repeat them but let them go in peace. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 19:19, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Actually, Dr K, much as I respect you, no, I don't know and I do not have "the elegance to understand that when someone is gone, to let them be gone", it is my dearest wish to have Geogre restored to us, an editor driven off by such arbs as RLevse.  Giacomo  19:31, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

The respect is mutual Giano. This has never been an issue. I am sorry if I was a little presumptuous to actually predict your behaviour by saying that "I know" how you would react. Normally, you would be right, I shouldn't be able to know how you would react. But I'm glad that I have to explain why I said it. I saw your defence of Mick during his last indef block and I also followed the eloquent arguments you made on his behalf to Scott. I was impressed. You acted as a statesman who eloquently, elegantly and effectively argued for due process and basic rights for the downtrodden. Even on behalf of an editor who bitterly opposed you. Remember the last ANI report that Mick brought against you? Now don't tell me that I don't know if you can take the high ground with respect to your opponents, especially when they are down. I know that you can and do. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 20:13, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

I shall not be posting here further, but you are mistaken, there is no high ground to take here. The case is quite clear and cut, there is no justification.  Giacomo  20:56, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Now that I analysed the situation I agree that I was mistaken. I replied on your talk. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 22:41, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

You'll be missed

I'm not sure who wanted it but, whatever has gone on, I assure you there are many editors who hope things resolve themselved. You have astounded me more than any other editor in going from rant to resourcefulness. I would love for that to happen again or even just for you to return to the amazing job you already (people do appreciate it even if it doesn't always feel that way). If that cannot be so then I wish you well in whatever you do and lots of luck for the future. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 21:19, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Yep. Rlevse, no matter what's gone on elsewhere, I've always enjoyed collaborating with you on your articles. I hope you treat this as a much-needed WikiBreak (we all need them every so often) rather than a permanent break. We all make mistakes in some form or the other, and I don't think anybody was looking to boot you because of this one. All the best, and hope to see you back soon, Dabomb87 (talk) 02:19, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Wow I'm in shock, I had two shocks at work the last couple of days, and now this in Wikipedia. I hope you do come back, and if you don't, thanks for all your hard work in this project. Secret ^account 02:24, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Wow, I can't believe it. One of our most respected users, gone :( you'll be missed, I echo the words of Secret and Dabomb87. Your work was well appreciated, I don't think that anyone wanted you to leave. Wikipedia now has lost another one. I do hope you come back. Take care and godspeed I hope whatever you're doing now it has to be better than what you had to experience here :( Warmest regards, —Ғяіᴆaз'§Đøøм • Champagne? • 9:42pm • 10:42, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Y'll be back, ande, the sooner the better! Lotje (talk) 14:55, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

You are missed. The last of my DYKs you dealt with, Piccolo Quintet, will be on this afternoon, at the same time I will be at the funeral of a friend. You wrote Ach so, when I explained, and I would like to continue that conversation. Who will ask now considerately if I really wanted a Bach cantata among the Halloween hooks? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:45, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Sorry to see you go. Any minor plagiarism issues certainly don't outweigh the shining example you've been to the project. You've been a crucial member of the DYK project and have done a magnificent job in posting DYKs. I really do wish the "community" would stop causing these "scandals" and making a big deal about everything. The community seems to have extreme perspectives that every editor, especially an admin or bureacrat should be functioning at a superhuman level and never show a human emotion or show any flaw whatsoever, however small. At times I've been exasperated at this lack of understanding that people are human and are subject to losing their temper or making the occasional error/creating a minor problem. I'd wager that every wikipedian who has written an encyclopedia article at some point has written text which could be argued to be plagiarism. When you are writing articles using the information from given sources it is is inevitable that this will occur from time to time. Sigh another good editor forced out..Please return, even if under a different identity. You are too valuable to be ousted over a few issues like this. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:49, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions, Rlevse. You made DYK a great place to work in. StrPby (talk) 07:12, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Oh, no. No, no, no. I'm so sorry to see you go - you're such a valuable contributor. I do hope you return; we will be much the poorer for your absence. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 14:06, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Just want to echo all of the above, you were a valuable Wikipedian and will be missed. Someday in the future I hope to be adding a welcome message and barnstar to a promising new editor that reminds me a lot of you. <wink wink nudge nudge> -- œ^™ 14:32, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 October newsletter

The 2010 WikiCup is over! It has been a long journey, but what has been achieved is impressive: combined, participants have produced over seventy featured articles, over five hundred good articles, over fifty featured lists, over one thousand one hundred "did you know" entries, in addition to various other pieces of recognised content. A full list (which has yet to be updated to reflect the scores in the final round) can be found here. Perhaps more importantly, we have our winner! The 2010 WikiCup champion is Sturmvogel_66 (submissions), with an unbelievable 4220 points in the final round. Second place goes to TonyTheTiger (submissions), with 2260, and third to Casliber (submissions), with 560. Congratulations to our other four finalists – White Shadows (submissions), William S. Saturn (submissions), Staxringold (submissions) and ThinkBlue (submissions). Also, congratulations to Sasata (submissions), who withdrew from the competition with an impressive 2685 points earlier in this round.

Prizes will also be going to those who claimed the most points for different types of content in a single round. It was decided that the prizes would be awarded for those with the highest in a round, rather than overall, so that the finalists did not have an unfair advantage. Winning the featured article prize is Casliber (submissions), for five featured articles in round 4. Winning the good article prize is Sturmvogel_66 (submissions), for eighty-one good articles in round 5. Winning the featured list prize is Staxringold (submissions), for six featured lists in round 1. Winning the picture and sound award is Jujutacular (submissions), for four featured pictures in round 3. Winning the topic award is Sturmvogel_66 (submissions), for forty-seven articles in various good topics in round 5. Winning the "did you know" award is TonyTheTiger (submissions), for over one hundred did you knows is round 5. Finally, winning the in the news award is Candlewicke (submissions), for nineteen articles in the news in round three.

The WikiCup has faced criticism in the last month – hopefully, we will take something positive from it and create a better contest for next year. Like Wikipedia itself, the Cup is a work in progress, and ideas for how it should work are more than welcome on the WikiCup talk page and on the scoring talk page. Also, people are more than welcome to sign up for next year's competition on the signup page. Well done and thank you to everyone involved – the Cup has been a pleasure to run, and we, as judges, have been proud to be a part of it. We hope that next year, however the Cup is working, and whoever is running it, it will be back, stronger and more popular than ever. Until then, goodbye and happy editing! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 03:10, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 Ribbon of Participation

		The WikiCup 2010 Ribbon of Participation
		Awarded to Rlevse, for participation in the 2010 WikiCup. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 08:59, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

WTF please?

Ridiculous. I don't care how long you're gone, but if you don't come back, a lot of the project has died. /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 20:56, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Seconded, I may not have known you well but looking at the work you've done over the years I don't think we care what mistakes you made, you were kind and helpful to new participants at DYK. You certainly helped me get my wings there :) as I'm sure you did, many others. —Ғяіᴆaз'§Đøøм • Champagne? • 10:14am • 23:14, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

did I like miss something?--White Shadows ^{Your guess is as good as mine} 03:24, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

I want to second White Shadows' question. Seriously, wtf happened that this great contributor decided to quit? Oo Regards SoWhy 10:48, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

He was caught plagiarising a featured article. Everyone makes mistakes, but his rude and dismissive attitude about it was completely out of order for an arbitrator, let alone an admin and bureaucrat. Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents/Plagiarism and copyright concerns on the main page may be enlightening. Aiken (talk) 11:01, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Oh crap. Sorry to see you go Rlevse. We've missed one of the best editors of this project. Luck in your future projects! Diego Grez (talk) 22:51, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Silver Knapsack Trail

-- Cirt (talk) 00:04, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Let's not pile on, here. Take the discussion elsewhere. — The Hand That Feeds You:Bite 19:20, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
It looks like this article only qualified for DYK due to the inclusion of a large chunk of copyrighted text.   Will Beback  talk  06:24, 2 November 2010 (UTC) No. per WP:WIADYK: "The listed items themselves are not counted as part of the 1,500 DYK qualifying characters." Please be careful. (olive (talk) 01:44, 3 November 2010 (UTC)) Let sleeping dogs lie. —Ғяіᴆaз'§Đøøм • Champagne? • 6:28pm • 07:28, 2 November 2010 (UTC) If you look above, you'll see quite a number of posts from people trying to wake up the dogs, so to speak.   Will Beback  talk  07:37, 2 November 2010 (UTC) This is a rather poor invocation of copyright. It is reasonable to outline criteria for a scouting award along with full attribution, there is no commercial issue here. Now this may be poor practice as far as building an encyclopedia but to slam it for copyright is marginal and appears vindictive. Polargeo 2 (talk) 11:17, 2 November 2010 (UTC) If this were an isolated incident, perhaps. But plagiarism is to be found in most of this editor's recent contributions. In the case of "Silver Knapsack Trail", about a third [1] of the article was material copied verbatim from websites that have clear copyright marks.[2][3] If the website owners who host or own this material weren't concerned about copyrights then why would they add those notices? The material in question was not a brief excerpt or a short quotation. It was the entirety of the content. That's a clear and outright copyright violation. Anyway, we don't need to hold this discussion here. I'm just saying this is a DYK with an asterisk.   Will Beback  talk  11:35, 2 November 2010 (UTC) People are leaving. This is why. Just shut it already. All this marginal bullshit annoys me. ResMar 02:17, 3 November 2010 (UTC) Copyvios are not "marginal bullshit". Like almost everything they can be excused, but Rlevse made it much harder to do so by trying to cover it up. It was a gamble, he lost and he drew the consequences. The editors here who are pretending it didn't happen or that it somehow doesn't matter are not doing him a favour because it keeps the focus on Rlevse's mistake at a time when it no longer matters and we are therefore free to judge his overall contributions, which most people agree were very positive. I don't understand why there is so much binary thinking on Wikipedia. For many there is nothing between a crook and a completely innocent person. These extremes hardly if ever exist in the real world. Hans Adler 09:19, 3 November 2010 (UTC) Here's a better idea for everyone (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:27, 3 November 2010 (UTC) As a 'janitor', I clean up after poor editors all through the week. But I don't expect to have clean up after an ArbCom member.   Will Beback  talk  10:58, 3 November 2010 (UTC) I once helped clean up the puke from the CEO of a chain of newspapers that I worked for. It happens. Are you suggesting that once an ArbComm member edits an article it's now final? Give your head a shake here. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:10, 3 November 2010 (UTC) I think what Will Beback is saying (and I agree with him) is that by the time somebody becomes an arb, it shoul be safe to presume that they know the rules, especially those concerning such fundamental basics as copyvio.  Giacomo  11:14, 3 November 2010 (UTC) Other than a handful of bots (that were programmed by a human), every other editor is a human being. We all do things the fast/convenient way sometimes. Just like those who choose not to vote should STFU and stop complaining, those who fail to try and fix a problem when they see it should STFU too. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:23, 3 November 2010 (UTC) When I have been drinking, it would be faster and more convenient to get behind the wheel and drive home. However, as I know it is morally and legally wrong - I don't. I employ effort and patience and call a taxi. When it comes to stealing other people's work because it is convenient - you speak for yourself - not "we all."  Giacomo  11:34, 3 November 2010 (UTC) Getting drunk, or being ill and puking, does not necessarily make one a poor leader. GHW Bush famously puked in the lap of a Japanese premier, but no one seriously questioned his ability to lead on that account. He was just sick and it was a one-time occurrence. But that is not like this situation, in which an ArbCom member has apparently engage in serial plagiarism.   Will Beback  talk  11:42, 3 November 2010 (UTC) (thank your favourite deity that you did not try to use a George W example) (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:44, 3 November 2010 (UTC) You're possibly confusing the skills required for copyediting with the skills required to mediate in disputes. The best articles are not created exclusively by admins. I've also seen some extremely dodgy and superficial cleaning up of copyvio issues by well respected and long-standing admins who should know the fundamental basics of copyvio better than anyone. People's attitudes are cavalier at all levels, so still struggling to see how a systematic problem has been pinned on one person. Socrates2008 (Talk) 11:56, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Woah

He's gone guys, leave well enough alone. There is no need to speak of someone in such a rude manner, sure he was an arb, admin and crat, that doesn't mean he, like the rest of us, isn't prone to making mistakes and what he did was on a fairly small scale compared to other incidents in relation to copyright. Those that did want him to leave, I hope you're happy, you just managed to get one of Wikipedia's finest contributors to just pack his bags and leave. If you're going to be rude and insulting, just ask yourself if you were in his position, what you would have done. Frankly, speaking as though all he'd ever done was plagiarise is just disgusting and bringing his positions into this situation is more than just disgusting. —Ғяіᴆaз'§Đøøм • Champagne? • 7:16pm • 08:16, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Concur. He's not perfect (who is?), but his contribution to the project was overwhelming positive and his departure a significant net loss. I share the copyvio concerns, but I don't agree with the vindictive and take-no-prisoners manner in which they have been taken up, even if he was an uber-Admin. Socrates2008 (Talk) 08:36, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

I think that Rlevse did a lot of great things for this project and contributed vast amounts of his time to make it better. We should all be grateful. However, there's also a problem that shouldn't be shoved under the rug. I don't see where anyone has been rude.   Will Beback  talk  08:45, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes, we'll he obviously isn't around anymore and maybe this was part of the reason. He gave up his tools and what is done is done, he isn't hanging around and trying to save face in this situation. There is no reason to continue being astounded on his talk page. Leaders, who are human, do fall. Nevertheless, there is more good to say about someone who volunteered and devoted a lot of time to the project. I enjoyed working at DYK with him and looked-up to his demeanor and work ethic. Lets remember the good, learn a lesson and move on.--NortyNort (Holla) 12:04, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

I didn't know the man, aside from once leaving a message on this page. But from what I observed, he exemplified the work ethic and the collegiality you mention. I take away from that something else entirely: anyone who cared as deeply for this project as he did, in my estimation, would want the mistake he made (and which, unfortunately, he will be in part remembered for) to be the reason behind changing the system so that it doesn't happen again. Intrinsic to the nature of wikipedia is the idea that the knowledge contained herein is got in an honest and straightforward way. In this instance, that did not happen. If by Rlevse's mistake we can learn a lesson, and put into effect changes that prevent its repetition, then he will have aided the project once again, however inadvertently. In the end, I believe that represents the way he felt about wikipedia: putting the aims of the project ahead of the sometimes selfish and sometimes flawed methods of a single individual -- in this case, himself. MarmadukePercy (talk) 12:38, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Don't make this permanent

I would hope that even the most vociferous of your critics would prefer that you continued but with future edits in line with that policy, rather than leaving the project. I suspect that in the future you would rather be "Rlevse who had this hiccup in his wiki career but had the most successful RFA of 2011", and not "Rlevse who left in 2010 on this note". By all means take a break, but please don't let this be the end. ϢereSpielChequers 12:58, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Please please come back. North8000 (talk) 10:28, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Rlevse’s parting statement

Wiki is horrible at educating editors. It has always expected people to know all the rules and to keep up with all the changes. This is impossible, even for dedicated long-tenured users. Given this and the way it's headed with the rules and all, many have and will stop producing content.

As I've said, if you don't source well, you get OR and cite needed tags, but if you source too closely, you get what happened to me. I never intended to do anything wrong. I had everything reffed; to the point that I had so many sources people told me remove some. To me that's attribution, but I guess to some it isn't. This isn't an excuse, I accept what I did, I goofed.

My goof was in not knowing where the swinging pendulum of "ref everything well but don't copy" pendulum was at. I've seen some other editors also mention this and how hard it is.

I grew up on wiki with "everything is okay as long as you have a valid RS for it" training--because if you don't you get cite needed tags. I never knew the pendulum was swinging back further away from that, more to the "don't closely paraphrase" school.

So I goofed here but my heart is with the project. However, wiki is its own worst enemy, it allows anyone to edit and has poor ineffective mechanisms for dealing with problem editors--this particular problem is essentially unsolvable. Shoot, I asked many people for help because I know I’m not good at writing, so why didn't Grace Sherwood get more closely checked until after it was on the Main Page? This points up the systemic problems so many have discussed.

I'm deeply sorry I've brought these problems to wiki and ArbCom. As stupid as it may sound, I thought I was in full compliance with policies. I know many will never believe that, but it's true, so you can call me stupid, but not legitimately claim I had ill intent of any sort.

I'm glad to have known many fine editors and upstanding people that I’ve encountered during my wiki career. Too bad my 5 years have now been overshadowed by this.

Rlevse

(posted by request by SirFozzie (talk) 20:12, 4 November 2010 (UTC))

That's right, it's all our fault. 217.171.129.69 (talk) 20:27, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Parting Statement

"Overshadowed" in only a few minds and hopefully not yours. Please come back! North8000 (talk) 20:23, 4 November 2010 (UTC)