Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Iloveminun

Outside comments

Statement/Comment by Sceptre

I should make at least a comment as I've run across ILM quite a few times in the last two weeks. As Tony has pointed out, he has been disruptive. He also seems to be stalking HighwayCello, if it is the correct term, to the point of sheer obnoxiousness. While HC may have initiated this conflict, ILM is taking it too far, especially with the cross-userspace move. Will (message me!) 17:07, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Statement by A Man In Black

ILM doesn't seem to me to be irredeemable, but (s?)he is determined to flout any advice, instruction, or corrective action. I've not interacted with ILM much since a fiasco about how to use fair-use images (which wasn't resolved until I protected the page and threatened ILM with a block), and (s)he has been merciless to HighwayCello for reasons I can't begin to imagine.

I urge corrective action, hopefully with some sort of injunction to put a stop to ILM's harassment of HC. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 20:56, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Statement by Ac1983fan

After watching all this Iloveminun shit go on for the past month or so, I am now finally speaking out. Because ILM seems to harass HighwayCello, and then claims he didn't do anything wrong, I believe that ILM probably is just simply a good editor with misguided intentions.--A c1983fan (talk • contribs) 17:29, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

13 June 2006 (UTC)

Statement by Alvin6226

Well, I want to start off by saying that I think that Poke Master is ILM. I am probably wrong but I am only going on the two facts that both their sigs are bolded in one color and that they have somewhat similiar goals. Anyways, I have seen ILM around WP:PCP and one case I have found particularly annoying is the certificate case found here[1]. As you can see, after he resizes the certificate, he awards it to himself for making it.... Also I have been looking at the User:HighwayCello/Minun page and can see why this is necessary. Alvin6226 ^talk 17:36, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for Checkuser

User:Minun

Minun (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
HighwayCeIIo (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

Imposter of User:HighwayCello, Minun has created other imposter accounts, noted at Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Minun and Category:Imposters of HighwayCello. User has had heavy sockpuppet usage. H ig hway ^Batman! 15:56, 10 July 2006 (UTC) 15:55, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note the name appears the same, but has to capital I's, instead of two Ls. H ig hway ^Batman! 15:57, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

HighwayCeIIo
HighwayCello

Stopped

I stopped doing those things a few weeks ago —M in un ^Spiderman 18:55, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree; Minun appears to have abandoned his former behaviour. He's been a model user in all my dealings with him, which occurred post-HighwayCello incident. ~ crazytales56297 -talk- 18:56, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly agree. --Gray Porpoise 13:54, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Minun still created dozens of sockpuppets and was incivil to various users, not just me. He has violated copyright, evaded blocks, removed warnings and other content from his talk pages, added false content to articles and caused me great annoyance and upset, up to the the point of accusing me of making death threats against his family. H ig hway ^{Return to Oz...} 13:59, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but that was before I stopped doing the things.

Anyway, I promise i'll stop, no blocks/bans are needed because I extremely promise I will stop, and if I continue (which I won't) you can block me indefinitely. Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaasssssssssssssssssssssssssssssse can I edit —M in un ^{Spiderman • Review Me} 14:01, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Begging isn't helping your case, this is out of my hands. H ig hway ^{Return to Oz...} 14:09, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I promise i'll stop, i'll even give you ten of each kind of barnstar tagged with different reasons if you want —M in un ^{Spiderman • Review Me} 14:12, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And do what with them? The best thing to do is what DMcDevit suggested, wait for your block to expire and return with a new start. H ig hway ^{Return to Oz...} 14:24, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I promise i'll stop, I just want to be a good editor, —M in un ^{Spiderman • Review Me} 14:27, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have heard what the rest of you have to say, but I think Minun should be given one more chance. Banning him for a year would probably prevent him from making good-faith edits that would more than make up for what he's done. It's the future- not the past- that's really important. --Gray Porpoise 14:54, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If Minun had turned over a new leaf and become a helpful editor, why is he only making this claim now? The case has been open since June, he didn't add any evidence, he's only making a fuss because he doesn't want blocked. H ig hway ^{Return to Oz...} 15:01, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fine, i'll list a couple of good thing i've done —M in un ^{Spiderman • Review Me} 15:04, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please read User:Minun/Good Things. After you've read that, theres a discussion going on at User talk:Minun/Good Things —M in un ^{Spiderman • Review Me} 15:43, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You may do better by revealing any bad things you have done in the past 3 weeks, any sockpuppets you have created or used, any talk page, email or IRC conversations that were not well received by the person you were talking to (let others decide if the poor reception was your fault), and any complaints anyone has lodged against you. If you reveal these, it would be easier to judge if you have changed. It would also give your detractors a chance to reveal anything you have left out (which is one reason why you should not try to hide anything). In addition, showing that you can actually honor a ban without attempting to evade it would show that you respect the ArbCom process. If you demonstrate good behavior, perhaps an appeal to suspend the ban subject to continued good behavior could be made on your behalf at some point in the future. But I think people want solid proof rather than just your assurances that you have reformed. NoSeptember 16:51, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

I did make a few tiny mistakes (related to the GA process) and made a few mistakes, but thats only small, and nothing deliberate, that wouldn't really be important —M in un ^{Spiderman • Review Me} 18:35, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Minun so far has made an effort to turn himself around. I would recomed however that First he should leave Highway alone, Second review all wikipedia policies to ensure in that he doesn;t break them or at the very least is aware of them, and Third refrain form using sockpuppet accounts.

Minun as a lot of potental as a editor, therefore I would recomend that if there is a binding decision on Minun that it be probation. And that any future violations be subject to a block.

I also agree with NoSeptembers Comment and that you reveal all sockpuppet accounts and any past incivilites. This would show that he is winning to play by the rules. Æon ^{Insane Ward} 18:56, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I did make a small mistake, when I failed a GA because of only one tiny problem (references) which could have been on hold, but theres nothing deliberate —M in un ^{Spiderman • Review Me} 19:04, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

End ban

Good [day, evening, etc.]. I have looked at the evidence and agree that Minun's done several things that he shouldn't have. However, those things are easily undone, and Minun contributed many good things to the encyclopedia. My suggestion for a compromise:

Minun's ban ends.
Minun is placed on probation.
He may only edit under one account (excluding Minunbot, if it gets approved).
If he causes more disruption, the ban resumes with a few more months added to the ban timer.

With respects those who participated in this request for arbitration, Gray Porpois e^{cetaceans have large brains} 21:01, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]