transferred here by me lest I lose it. Abtract ( talk) 16:46, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
Users should only edit one summary or view, other than to endorse.
This is a summary written by users who are concerned by this user's conduct. Only users who certify this request should edit the "Statement of the dispute" section.
Abtract seems to engage in both slow and rapid edit warring regularly on multiple articles, often related, skirting the 3RR policy while continuing refusal to desist and discuss. Numerous warnings left, but only one block [1] at this time due primarily to being given chances to correct and pages being protected instead. He seems to be gaming the system with his stopping early to avoid a block. Recent examples:
3RR warnings he's received from multiple editors since December (both regular and templated): [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18]
And two 3RR reports filed: 10 April 2008 (no violation though several commented that he should be blocked), 20 May 2008 (Warned) ( said warning).
He has also shown incivility against other editors, particularly User:Sesshomaru with accusations of stalking [19] [20] [21], referring to him as "the single most awkward, boring and up yourself editor that it has been my displeasure to meet in my time on wp" [22], and has called him a maniac in a {{ help me}} [23]. An AN/I was filed Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive391#Complete rudeness from User:Abtract in which Abstract said he would not make insults anymore. He has made what appears to be an attack page [24] against Sesshomaru, though he may possibly consider it a potential RfC of his own if the footer is a possible indicator.
Has told other editors to "stop badgering him" when they asked him to respect an arbitration in progress [25], has been warned about his "snarky edit summaries" [26] (in reference to several edit summaries here), and told an admin who was trying to correct him to "grow up and act like an admin" [27]. When warned about civility, he responded with "intriguing; do you have an incivility meter?" [28]. He's falsely edit warred by calling undoing of his disruptions as vandalism. [29] [30] [31].
Several editors, including User:LessHeard vanU (who attempted arbitration), User:Redrocket, User:Collectonian, User:Paul Erik, and User:Arcayne have tried to talk to him, explain how he is being disruptive and violating policies and guidelines, and offer corrective advice. He generally responds to warnings with brush offs, flippancy or sarcasm, and "thanks for stopping by" comments. [32] [33] [34] [35] [36] [37] [38] [39] [40] [41] [42]
This is the second RfC against Abtract, with the first being deleted for uncertified within the necessary time. Since that RfC, Abtract created an "alter-ego" User:Abstract. He has not used it to perform any edits yet, but curious as to why it was done at all.
List the policies and guidelines that apply to the disputed conduct.
Abtract to receive an appropriate block for his most receive behaviors. For him to agree to to avoid any and all edit warring in the future, stop being disruptive, and be required to use talk page discussions to settle disputes. For him to agree not revert anything other than true vandalism more than once before engaging in discussion, and this one-revert limit to be enforceable with a block. Abtract to cease all accusations of stalking and insults against User:Sesshomaru, and to avoid anymore contact with or interactions with as much as possible. Abtract to stop being flippant with other editors, including him to stop ignoring warnings and corrections he is given. If felt helpful, Abtract agreeing to mentoring.
Users who tried and failed to resolve the dispute.
---
Additional users endorsing this cause for concern.
Any users may post questions in this section. Answers should be reserved for those certifying the dispute.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
{This is a summary written by the user whose conduct is disputed. Users not named in the request or certifying the request should post under Additional views below.}
List the policies and guidelines that apply to the response.
Any users may post questions in this section. Answers should be reserved for the user named in the dispute.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
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.
{Enter summary here.}
Users who endorse this summary:
This section is for all users to propose solutions to resolve this dispute. This section is not a vote and resolutions are not binding except as agreed to by involved parties.
1)
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
2)
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
3)
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
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.
transferred here by me lest I lose it. Abtract ( talk) 16:46, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
Users should only edit one summary or view, other than to endorse.
This is a summary written by users who are concerned by this user's conduct. Only users who certify this request should edit the "Statement of the dispute" section.
Abtract seems to engage in both slow and rapid edit warring regularly on multiple articles, often related, skirting the 3RR policy while continuing refusal to desist and discuss. Numerous warnings left, but only one block [1] at this time due primarily to being given chances to correct and pages being protected instead. He seems to be gaming the system with his stopping early to avoid a block. Recent examples:
3RR warnings he's received from multiple editors since December (both regular and templated): [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18]
And two 3RR reports filed: 10 April 2008 (no violation though several commented that he should be blocked), 20 May 2008 (Warned) ( said warning).
He has also shown incivility against other editors, particularly User:Sesshomaru with accusations of stalking [19] [20] [21], referring to him as "the single most awkward, boring and up yourself editor that it has been my displeasure to meet in my time on wp" [22], and has called him a maniac in a {{ help me}} [23]. An AN/I was filed Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive391#Complete rudeness from User:Abtract in which Abstract said he would not make insults anymore. He has made what appears to be an attack page [24] against Sesshomaru, though he may possibly consider it a potential RfC of his own if the footer is a possible indicator.
Has told other editors to "stop badgering him" when they asked him to respect an arbitration in progress [25], has been warned about his "snarky edit summaries" [26] (in reference to several edit summaries here), and told an admin who was trying to correct him to "grow up and act like an admin" [27]. When warned about civility, he responded with "intriguing; do you have an incivility meter?" [28]. He's falsely edit warred by calling undoing of his disruptions as vandalism. [29] [30] [31].
Several editors, including User:LessHeard vanU (who attempted arbitration), User:Redrocket, User:Collectonian, User:Paul Erik, and User:Arcayne have tried to talk to him, explain how he is being disruptive and violating policies and guidelines, and offer corrective advice. He generally responds to warnings with brush offs, flippancy or sarcasm, and "thanks for stopping by" comments. [32] [33] [34] [35] [36] [37] [38] [39] [40] [41] [42]
This is the second RfC against Abtract, with the first being deleted for uncertified within the necessary time. Since that RfC, Abtract created an "alter-ego" User:Abstract. He has not used it to perform any edits yet, but curious as to why it was done at all.
List the policies and guidelines that apply to the disputed conduct.
Abtract to receive an appropriate block for his most receive behaviors. For him to agree to to avoid any and all edit warring in the future, stop being disruptive, and be required to use talk page discussions to settle disputes. For him to agree not revert anything other than true vandalism more than once before engaging in discussion, and this one-revert limit to be enforceable with a block. Abtract to cease all accusations of stalking and insults against User:Sesshomaru, and to avoid anymore contact with or interactions with as much as possible. Abtract to stop being flippant with other editors, including him to stop ignoring warnings and corrections he is given. If felt helpful, Abtract agreeing to mentoring.
Users who tried and failed to resolve the dispute.
---
Additional users endorsing this cause for concern.
Any users may post questions in this section. Answers should be reserved for those certifying the dispute.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
{This is a summary written by the user whose conduct is disputed. Users not named in the request or certifying the request should post under Additional views below.}
List the policies and guidelines that apply to the response.
Any users may post questions in this section. Answers should be reserved for the user named in the dispute.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
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.
{Enter summary here.}
Users who endorse this summary:
This section is for all users to propose solutions to resolve this dispute. This section is not a vote and resolutions are not binding except as agreed to by involved parties.
1)
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
2)
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
3)
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
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.