Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Historical archive/Conflicts between users/Archive

< Wikipedia:Historical archive | Conflicts between users
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ed Poor (talk | contribs) at 15:11, 3 October 2003 (changing my vote from "no" to "temp": Eloquence was right!). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

With a common goal of accumulating, ordering, structuring and making freely available what knowledge in mind, if we concentrate on achieving NPOV even when it is difficult, if we try to actually understand those we label problem users, then we can reach the state of WikiLove. If we fail to achieve WikiLove, the encyclopedia as a whole will suffer. Some key components to achieve WikiLove and work in the general spirit of collegiality and mutual understanding is to

  • Follow Wikiquette -- respect other contributors
  • Follow our policies -- they make it easier to work with one another
  • Keep the neutral point of view in mind -- write articles that people from all sides can read and agree with
  • Forgive and forget. Don't allow yourself to be hurt; to hurt others; to allow others to be hurt. Do try to accomodate other people's views.

In general, time spent complaining about problem users is less productive than an equal amount of time spent writing encyclopedia articles. But if you must complain, please sign and date your entries so they can be removed when they are no longer relevant. Please also list the most recent additions at the top of this page.

If you are listed here, then you may comment on the accusation that you are a problem user and ask that your name be taken off the list. You may not remove yourself from this page.

Recommendations for adding users to this page

  • First discuss the issues with the user in question, and do everything in your power to get a resolution that way. In many cases it's possible to resolve the issue with discussion, without getting the rest of the community involved.
  • Be specific in your criticism. Give diff links to individual edits that demonstrate the problem. Say exactly why you find these edits a problem.
  • Sign and date your comments

List of controversial users

Most recent at top.

RK

  • Eloquence temporarilly banned RK for "vandalizing" other contributors' user pages, and talk:Christian-Jewish reconciliation, blanking them and replacing them with personal attacks. RK apparently did this in response to other contributors' leaving messages on his user talk page.
  • User:AxelBoldt un-banned RK the next day.

RK's now left Wikipedia. (Hurrah!)

m:RK

Ban RK?

  • Yes (3)
  • Temporarily(3)
    • User:rickyrab for being a nudnik (a pest) to the whole Jewish/Catholic debate.
    • Cimon Avaro on a pogo-stick 04:50, 3 Oct 2003 (UTC) took a closer look at the specific events which precipitated the user block, RK is the one who was out of control at that particular point in time. He definitely needs to get control of himself, and realize that he is not indispensible to wikipedia.
    • User:Ed Poor I changed my mind and now see the wisdom of User:Eloquence's temporary ban (which is already over anyway!).
  • Permanently (1)
    • FearÉIREANN (very reluctantly. RK's behaviour at this stage seems out of control and no amount of appeals to him to stop seem to work. Banning should be a last resort. As he ignores all appeals, POVs articles, blanks articles, calls 2/3 of wiki anti-semite (and wikipedia nazipedia) what alternative is there? He has been shown a degree of toleration no-one else has been shown. Indeed many of those banned caused far less trouble and insulted far fewer people. If we don't impose a soft ban, how else are we going to deal with RK's at this stage disgraceful behaviour? And if we don't impose a soft ban, what sort of message will RK's continuing bad behaviour send to everyone else? So, in the belief that there is now no alternative, a reluctant 'yes')
  • No (1)
    • User:Lir I believe Erik abused his sysop powers, when he banned RK.
    • Cimon Avaro on a pogo-stick the process is "out of control" and should be halted immediately. If RK can not reform his ways, we will soon find out. Require him to talk to Jimbo before reinstating him without prejudice. If he turns out to be a recidivist; act then, if at all.

Some opinions expressed elsewhere.

Yes:

  • Lotsa folks who I can't be bothered to list

No:

Respectfully, placed a sort of summary at User:Anthere/summary, because there were so many discussions about whether this is allowed or not, and in which space, that I have no idea what is in the rules or against the rules. Feel free to move it.

User:Mir Harven

  • (contribs) Repeatedly blanking and removing material contributed in good faith to controversial discussions (usually relating to Croatian langauge) and replacing them with agressive and threatening replies (eg "Greater Serbian crap about Croatian & Bosnian "newspeak" deleted. Heal your inferiority complexes elsewhere. If this crap persist-you'll get exposed in a way you truly deserve. Mind your own biz and keep out of Croatian lang page with your filthy hate.")Almost impossible to engage, as he repeatedly blanks and erases any attemps. At a loss to know what to do.
    • Also appears to edit from the 195.29.xxx.xxx range. I don't know who's right, factually and morally speaking, but Mir Harven hasn't really cottoned on to the whole Wikiquette and consensus-editing concepts. -- Cyan 06:59, 2 Oct 2003 (UTC)

User:Pagingmrherman

moved from Vandalism in progress

  • User:66.20.28.21 has created a vanity page John Hickman and is inserting offsite links to articles by Hickman (a seemingly unencylopedic assistant professor) in numerous places of debateable relevance. -- Finlay McWalter 16:30, 29 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Now has alternate identity, User:PReeve18, up to the same stuff. -- Finlay McWalter 22:27, 29 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Older alternate identity, again doing same stuff, is User:John Hickman. -- Finlay McWalter 08:44, 30 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • How is this vandalism? Dotwarner 16:25, 30 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • How is Finlay McWalter, a nature photographer, competent to address the relevance of contributions or edits involving political science and history? Why should readers be made prisoners of McWalters' cranky obsessions?
    • (Psst, "cranky obsessions" is a violation of Wikiquette. Argue against the substantive issue, and try not to descend to name calling. Note that Finlay has only questioned whether the content you have added is appropriate for an encyclopedia, and not your personal worth.) -- Cyan 22:39, 30 Sep 2003 (UTC) end of moved text
    • I don't think the move from Vandalism in progress to this page was necessarily appropriate as this user has also vandalised Karada's user page. Angela 00:06, Oct 1, 2003 (UTC)
    • Well, there are two things. First, the complaint that I moved didn't include that tidbit, and I didn't check his contributions (my bad). Second, sometimes new users don't understand the difference between a User page and a User talk page. If the vandalism were rampant, I would go and make a separate post on ViP. -- Cyan 03:02, 1 Oct 2003 (UTC)
    • I don't think his "comments" on Karada's page were mistakenly placed there while looking for the talk page. It seemed like a dig directly related to Karada placing his article on VfD. Anyway, it may not be bad enough to get him on the vandalism page. Here will do! Angela 03:11, 1 Oct 2003 (UTC)


  • 206.172.171.1 whilst not actually a vandal this person is clearly pro-nazi and has sneaked pro-nazi POV edits into articles. Those who are concerned about such things might want to keep an eye on them.
    • Took a quick look, and it seems debatable. The guy isn't going overboard, so we'll just keep a lookout. No red alerts are necessary at this time. --Modemac 09:38, 28 Sep 2003 (UTC)
      • I'm not so sure- anyone who changes a description of the book The Turner Diaries from "race-hate fantasy" to "racial revolutionary fiction" ( on the National Alliance page) and regards violent race-hate mongers like Combat 18 as 'revolutionary' certainly needs to have an eye kept on them...
    • They're not revolutionary? I wasn't aware Combat 18 had pacifist tendencies... ;-) Martin 20:19, 28 Sep 2003 (UTC)
      • 'revolutionary' doesn't imply 'violent'-Pacifism could be argued to be a very revolutionay idea... OTOH C18 are just a bunch of thugs from looking at their website quercus robur 20:27, 28 Sep 2003 (UTC)
        • ;-)

User:Jtdirl

The story (written by various):

Opinions follow:

  • LirQ felt that Jtdirl's actions were inappropriate.
  • RickK and Cyan felt that Jtdirl's actions were fine
  • Angela suggested the normal rules of protection did not apply
  • Martin felt that it was perhaps a minor faux pas, but certainly not abuse

Listed 02:18, Sep 26, 2003 (UTC)

Malcs64

  1. Blanked Tarquin's user page and replaced it with a personal attack on him.
  2. Personal attacks made on his own user page
  3. Personal attacks made on the Village pump.
  4. Various other snide comments on the Village pump
  5. Personal attacks made on various talk pages such as Talk:Taxi Driver, Talk:Janis Ian.
  6. Personal attacks made on the Nose-picking article.
  7. Consistently trying to advertise his own website in inappropriate ways and in inappropriate places.

Angela 18:04, Sep 23, 2003 (UTC)


User:Heine

This posting by User:Vancouverguy is insulting, irrelevant and pure nonsens, and I ask someone to delete it. Heine 23:48, 12 Sep 2003 (UTC)

  • User:Heine has been constantly trying to rename Nuuk to Godthab. --User:Vancouverguy
    • Putting this on this page in inappropriate. It's a dispute and edit war over usage, not pure vandalism. See Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers --Jiang 00:58, 31 Aug 2003 (UTC)
      • This user is a known vandal. See his user page.Vancouverguy 01:00, 31 Aug 2003 (UTC)
        • I'm not a vandal and have never been. It's correct that I've been involved in some edit wars, but the accuse of vandalism is false. Actually, I will rather consider User:Vancouverguy as a vandal, since he has vandalized a lot of my edits. See for instance [[Talk:Bygd%F8y-Frogner]]
        • Heine is a repeated vandal under several disguises, including User:Henrik. RickK 01:01, 31 Aug 2003 (UTC)
          • The Nuuk example seems to have been an edit war, not vandalism. Can you justify your claim regarding Heine being a vandal? -- The Anome 23:00, 12 Sep 2003 (UTC)
            • Huh? Me, a vandal?! You've got to be kidding! We had consensus that Nuuk was not Godthab. That's why I reverted all your edits. Vancouverguy 23:14, 12 Sep 2003 (UTC)
              • I've never mentioned the name «Godthab» but Godthåb. It's the name of the city, call it what YOU want and I call it by the correct name. But I haven't edited the article anymore. Heine 23:38, 12 Sep 2003 (UTC)
        • See Special:Contributions/Henrik, Special:Contributions/Rikke and Special:Contributions/Heine. Writing things like "User:Angela is the notorious vandal who is vandalising all my articles" at the top of my user page and on my talk page numerous times. Replacing RickK's talk page with the word 'blocked' and later with 'User:RickK is the notorious vandal hanging around here' and then 'Please notice that RickK is the repeatedly-reverted vandal and nationalist who is destroying every article containing a single non-English word. Pathetic. Heine'. Just a few examples; I'm sure there are more under his various IP addresses. Angela 23:18, Sep 12, 2003 (UTC)
          • This was a respond on repeated vandalism on my edits by Angela, RIckK and Vancouverguy. Everything I wrote was vandalized, mostly without reason, by these tree person. There are examples enough. They even vandalized my own user page several times. AND NOW THIS COMMENT WAS DELETED! Heine 23:36, 12 Sep 2003 (UTC)
          • Proof of Heine's vandalism: this, from George W. Bush: "George Walker Bush. The not elected leader of the former British colony of «USA» in the south of North America. He is most known as a war criminal, responsible for the the terror attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq and murder of thousands of Iraqi og Afghanian women and children."
        • Heine is believed by many to be Henrik;
      • User:Henrik needs to go. RickK 02:11, 28 Aug 2003 (UTC)
  • Heine came in tonight (September 20) and immediately deleted his section of this page, then began making changes to the Tel Aviv and Israel pages which he tried to mask as minor changes, but which actually were trying to make Tel Aviv the capital of Israel, which is nothing if not controversial. RickK 02:47, 21 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Hello again, Rick! According to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Tel Aviv is the capital of Israel. At least where I am (the Kingdom of Norway), this is official (and uncontroversial). In my opinion, I have done nothing wrong when I added that Tel Aviv was the capital of the country in the Tel Aviv article. What really is controversial, is the claim for Jerusalem being capital. This claim is not recognized by the world community (other nations)! Heine
    • The above was done as user 80.213.11.51. He is still trying to put foreign names first in articles, under a number of IP addresses. Angela 03:36, Sep 21, 2003 (UTC)
      • Well, in case i have, now only in new articles I've written. And I followed you advice, for instance on Universities of Berlin when I later added a new link. User:Heine
        • That is true - he does seem to be more open to suggestions to make changes to his articles now. Angela
    • Heine is correct. 90% of the world regards Tel Aviv, which was the accepted capital in 1948, as the legitimate capital. Jerusalem was a neutral city. The international community continues to exist that Israel had no legal right to seize and use Jerusalem as its capital. So other than Israel, the US and four or five countries, everyone else on the planet insists that Tel Aviv is the legal capital of Israel, Jerusalem the unilaterally declared capital. Hence states base their embassies in Tel Aviv, not Jerusalem. FearÉIREANN 21:13, 26 Sep 2003 (UTC)
          • That is as may be, but he tried to hide it by calling it a minor edit. RickK 00:45, 29 Sep 2003 (UTC)
            • Only because I thought it was minor edits. Heine 01:29, 29 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Heine is now creating his own encyclopedia inside the Wikipedia name space. See User:Heine/HeineWiki. RickK 02:57, 23 Sep 2003 (UTC)

  • It might just be his version of a temp article with a bad choice of page name. A lot of people create articles in their user sub pages when for some reason they don't want to edit the main article, and in this case, Norway is protected so he has little other choice. Angela 03:01, Sep 23, 2003 (UTC)
  • Cool down, Rick, it's just an archive, showing how I think the main article should be. Heine
    • Right. You're involved in an edit war on Norway, so you try to create your version on your own space as a cometing article. RickK 00:45, 29 Sep 2003 (UTC)

re:foreign (official) names. What about Médecins Sans Frontières? Shouldn't then this article be changed to Doctors Without Borders? What do you think? Heine

No. Wiki does not translate names into english, it uses the version used by english speakers. English speakers use Médecins Sans Frontières, just as they use Tsar, Taoiseach, etc. If a non-english term is used in english, then it is used on wiki and not translated. FearÉIREANN 21:11, 30 Sep 2003 (UTC)

reinserted comment deleted by Heine on 23rd September:


Someone that acts like Heine is involved in an edit war on Norway. -- Gustavf 06:39, 23 Sep 2003 (UTC)

So? Being in an edit war doesn't make someone a problem user, or at least doesn't require them to be listed on this page. There would be dozens of people listed here each week if that were the case. Angela 03:08, 26 Sep 2003 (UTC)
No, but Heine was listed on this page. Other comments about his edits, that alone would not be enough to be listed on this page, is also included here. I thought that people keeping an eye on Heine's activities probably would like to be made aware of the edit war. I probably should have mentioned that I was also part of the same edit war. -- Gustavf 06:38, 26 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Heine, perhaps if you stopped deleting comments about yourself from this page people might not regard you as a problem. Angela 17:36, Sep 23, 2003 (UTC)
It's not forbidden to be involved in edit wars. And Gustavf is also involved in the edit war, he is the other part in it. Maybe I should add him too to this list?? By the way: Many people (Vancouverguy, for instance) have deleted my comments on this page. Heine
Well it's not exactly permitted. Vancouverguy probably shouldn't have done that. Angela 03:08, 26 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Heine replaced picture of George W. Bush with one from a website comparing him to a monkey. InanimateCarbonRod 19:36, 28 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Comparing him to? I replaced the picture with another picture of Bush, which I think is better: Image:George_w._bush.jpg. I'm sorry if you didn't like it. Heine 22:14, 28 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Sure, be diingenuous. After your first foray into Wikipedia when you made highly POV comments on the George W. Bush page, it's hard to think that you added that picture just because you think it's better. By the way, what's the copyright status of that picture? RickK 00:45, 29 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Sorry, common sense says otherwise. Any neutral person would agree which was the better portrait. Doesn't fly.Ark30inf 22:20, 28 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Well, well, what can we expect from a person who on his user page declares: "I'm a conservative. I'm a Republican. I am a Southerner. I own a Confederate flag. I watch FOX News. " I think the new portrait was characteristic, and more interesting for the readers than his own pompous portrait. Heine 22:42, 28 Sep 2003 (UTC)
I invite anyone to look at my user page and read the whole thing rather than the portion that you have taken out of context. The fact that you did so says quite a bit. Ark30inf 22:45, 28 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Problem users special features

  • Discussions relating to Daniel C. Boyer are now a Problem users special feature! Gasp as Boyer challenges Kat to explain herself! Thrill at SpeakerFTD's dramatic intervention! Read on at Wikipedia:Problem users/Daniel C. Boyer.

Other users

  • User:Rickyrab has added garbage to this page, as well as my talk page. He appearently is trying to get attention. Vancouverguy 00:59, 3 Oct 2003 (UTC)
    • User:Vancouverguy is right: I was trying to get attention. Can be hard to do in a world so busy as Wikipedia! :-) Rickyrab 02:01, 3 Oct 2003 (UTC)
  • User:144.82.100.120 Perhaps a little hasty of me to put this user down.. but probably worth half an eye on. Three edits. One completely bogus. Two vPOV. Pete 15:39, 16 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • User:216.101.109.178 adding nonsense and/or irrelevant material to a number of articles in quick succession. Often adding the same information to lots of different pages, which have since been deleted. Angela 03:24, Sep 12, 2003 (UTC)
  • User:68.33.82.8 is entering a number of William Faulkner characters such as Quentin Compson and Rosa Coldfield that are potential copyright violations from this website [3] and Gerald O'Hara from [4] User hasn't responded to other queries on their talk page. This user seems to be learning as s/he goes and may not have discovered the talk page.Ark30inf 21:47, 9 Sep 2003 (EDT)
    • User:68.33.82.8 is now adding huge clumps of articles about Biblical figures, both obscure and less obscure. I am doing my best to keep up with them, altering these articles (in most cases, the Biblical character is worth a stub), but if anyone has time to help, I'd appreciate it. I've fixed Caleb, Nabal, Kenezites, and Revised Version, and am beginning to tackle Jethro, but it's slow going. Thanks! Jwrosenzweig 22:08, 11 Sep 2003 (UTC)
      • I think its time to ban the IP. We have given the user several days to find the talk page or see the copyright boilerplate on the articles they have already entered.Ark30inf 20:42, 12 Sep 2003 (UTC)

most recent at top

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Historical_archive/Conflicts_between_users/Archive&oldid=1519673"