Wikipedia Arbitration
About arbitration Talk Arbitration policy (CU/OS) Guide to arbitration Noticeboard +  Talk Search archived proceedings Ban appeals Report
Open proceedings All open requests Case requests Clarification and Amendment requests Arbitrator motion requests Enforcement requests
Active sanctions Contentious topics ( Log) General sanctions Editor sanctions
Arbitration Committee Discuss + Contact Members Procedures Elections Talk History Clerks +  Talk Clerk procedures Conflict of interest reports
Audit Talk Statistics Talk Reports (pre-2016)
Track related changes
v t e

Reminders from drafting arbitrators concerning evidence deadline: To non-parties: The evidence phase for non-parties has closed. New evidence may not be added to this page without the committee's consent. To editors listed as parties to this dispute: Evidence submissions will not be accepted on or after 8 February 2013. Please ensure your evidence is submitted before that day. Thank you, AGK [•] 18:10, 3 February 2013 (UTC) reply

Create your own section to provide evidence in, and do not edit anyone else's section. Please keep your evidence concise, and within the default limits. If you wish to exceed the default lengths, you must request the agreement of the arbitrators to do so on the /Evidence talk page before posting. Unapproved overlength evidence, or inappropriate material and/or diffs, may be refactored, redacted or removed entirely.

Any editor may add evidence to this page, irrespective of whether they are involved in the dispute. Create your own section and do not edit another editor's section. By default, the evidence submission length is limited to about 1000 words and about 100 diffs for named parties; and about 500 words and about 50 diffs for non-party editors. While in general it is is more effective to make succinct yet detailed submissions, users who wish to submit over-length evidence may do so by posting a request on the /Evidence talk page. Unapproved overlong evidence may be trimmed to size or removed by the Clerk without warning.

Focus on the issues that are important to the dispute and on diffs which illustrate the nature of the dispute.

You must use the prescribed format in your evidence. Evidence should include a link to the actual page diff in question, or to a short page section; links to the page itself are insufficient. Never link to a page history, an editor's contributions, or a log for all actions of an editor (as those change over time), although a link to a log for a specific article or a specific block log can be useful. Please make sure any page section links are permanent; see simple diff and link guide.

General discussion of the case will not be accepted on this page, and belongs on the talk page. The Arbitration Committee expects that all rebuttals of other evidence submissions will be included in your own section and will explain how the evidence is incorrect. Please do not refactor the page or remove evidence presented by others. If something is put in the wrong place, only an Arbitrator or Clerk may move it.

Arbitrators may analyze evidence and other assertions at /Workshop, which is open for comment by parties, Arbitrators, and others. After arriving at proposed principles, findings of fact, or remedies, Arbitrators vote at /Proposed decision. Only Arbitrators (and Clerks, when clarification on votes is needed) may edit the proposed decision page.

Current word length: 1170; diff count: 46.

Move-warring over incomplete articles

Doncram creates incomplete, unsuitable articles in mainspace, and then move-wars when other editors userfy them. A recent example:

• Creation of List of Congregational churches
• Fram moves it to Doncram's userspace, after two hours. Note the error messages and visible wikimarkup, e.g. link brackets. Fram's ES was Not useful as it stands, bring back once it is somewhat complete and presentable.
• Doncram moves it back without improving it, with the ES restore, continue development. If someone seriously thinks this is not an obviously valid Wikipedia list-article topic, open a proper AFD ...
• After expansion, Doncram leaves it again, with visible errors, markup, and placeholder text.

Doncram fails to see a problem with his article creation

When Ryan Vesey asked him to consider starting articles at AfC, Doncram responded I don't think that my article creations are any problem. There is no problem with articles that I create, and simply having someone else review my articles would not satisfy the editors following me and contending. See 05/2011's Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John W. Ross for reasons I find that iffy. More recently, he created Edmund Lind (architect), not realizing Edmund George Lind existed since 2008. When he merged the articles, he copied it verbatim, giving the article two ledes.

In a lengthy discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places/Archive 49#George F. Barber, Doncram commented, in part, so what if in an early draft i was still sorting out which Barbers were which. I responded when you persistently put information into mainspace without bothering to verify it first, the problem is _not_ all the people who keep telling you not to do that. You damage the encyclopedia when you do that, and it needs to stop, to which Doncram's answer was That is a glib and stupid comment, in context of what i do.

Doncram exaggerates to the point of mendacity

Doncram stated here that nearly 100% of Sitush's interactions with him on Talk:List of Other Backward Classes were disparaging, when a quick review shows no such thing.

Move warring because he dislikes the mover

• Doncram created C.E. Bell in December 2011, using the NRIS database and a special collections listing as references.
• I looked up Bell's name, and moved the article to Charles E. Bell, citing WP:NCP, expanding the names in the next edit.
• Doncram immediately reverted the move with ES move back. Open a Requested move for a proper discussion, don't choose the most confrontational option every damn time, Sarek. and the edit with ES restore C.E. Bell in lede. I do believe it is likely that this person's fuller name is Charles E. Bell (and I set up a redirect previously), but that is not established by sources.
• I reverted with summary moved C.E. Bell to Charles E. Bell over redirect: Use the RM process if you disagree, don't move war.
• Shortly afterward, Doncram comments on the talk page for C.E. Bell (now redirecting to Charles) I believe the most common name used by this person is C.E. Bell. I do believe his first name is Charles, but that is not established by sources and it is also not established that Charles E. Bell is more common. and then reverts the move again, breaking the link to the C.E. talk page.
• I added Charles to the lede, adding a reference that used Bell's full name, and moved the article back, with a WP:CIR summary.
• Doncram reverted the move again and removed Charles from the lede, ignoring the source I had added to the article and again claiming I do believe it is likely that this person's fuller name is Charles E. Bell (and I set up a redirect previously), but that is not established by sources..
• I reverted again and added information and references, including his birth year -- previously, the article had no indication of when Bell lived and worked.
• Doncram did not continue the war, but commented that an editor who seems to be actively seeking confrontation over any damn cause, has repeatedly interrupted and moved this article and Talk pages.

A week later, there was another move war. When I self-reported, Doncram's comments included SarekOfVulcan has been following my edits, apparently to find fault and to dispute whatever he can, I don't think that SarekOfVulcan actually cares about the name of this article. I don't really either, and I consider this all to be a disruption of wikipedia, a wp:POINTY, bad faith campaign. The title he was move-warring to was "Girls' Domestic Science and Arts Building-Arkansas Tech University", against naming guidelines and only supported by the NRIS database, not the other sources I had added to the article.

Making inferences from insufficient info

In 07/2012, Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive760#Doncram at it again linked to this diff, which I summarized as He starts off by apologizing for wasting future readers' time with actually responding to us. He states that I have no idea what I'm talking about, Orlady has no idea what she's talking about, and [Avanu has] no idea what [he's] talking about, and that he knows what he's talking about, even though he doesn't actually know what he's talking about, but that doesn't matter because he's right anyway.. The cause of that was Doncram claiming the railroad survived to the present, because of an NRIS listing, following an existing statement that it survived until 1938.

In an example from 06/2011, Doncram adds a FindAGrave reference showing a architect was born in 1903 only 25 minutes after listing a church he designed in 1912.

In 10/2010, Doncram decided that the US and Canadian Elks were the same, despite previous talkpage discussion to the contrary. I checked Elks (disambiguation). Seems not contentious, seems obvious.

Expand on Elkman evidence re list of churches

• Doncram creates List of Unitarian churches, including two Methodist churches, on 12/5
• MaxSem (uninvolved) modifies {{ coord}} on 12/6, causing errors to appear in articles with blanks in the template
• Nyttend removes the blank templates and redlinked See Also entries on 12/7
• Doncram reverts later with the ES restore article. Please do discuss at Talk. Continuing...
• Doncram comments that Repeatedly deleting a lot of the work-in-progress in a brand new list-article under active construction is, IMO, obviously wp:DISRUPT disruptive, and/or wp:POINTY, and/or other bad, non-collegial things.
• Doncram comments out some of the blanks, with ES comment out some empty coords for now, pending template coord programming fix
• Doncram merges the List of Unitarian Churches article on 12/10 to List of Unitarian, Universalist, and Unitarian Universalist churches, created 10/2009
• Orlady briefly userfies the article on 12/11, but undoes it quickly saying her action was unduly precipitate.
• Doncram continues expanding the article.
• Orlady removes the two Methodist churches on 12/14 with ES removing two churches that give no hint of Unitarian or Universalist or UU affilation.
• Doncram null edits 12 minutes later to inform Orlady big f deal, someone following and arguably harassing finds an edit to make that i obviously woulda gotten to, working down the list. result of a past editing error copying table format i think. big f deal. (See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Other Backward Classes for other discussion between them then.)
• Doncram makes his last edit on 12/18, leaving many redlinks with no explanation of notability, such as Unitarian Universalist Church of Fort Myers with "founded built" lacking dates.

Doncram calls Orlady evil

Besides Elkman's 12/2012 diff, there are these two comments from 07/2012, which after ANI discussion led to Cbl62's month of reviews. Also, this from JimboTalk.

Sourcing and tagging

On 12/31, Doncram removed {{ one source}} and {{ ref improve}} from an article sourced only to the NRIS with ES No specific item is questioned, no additional sourcing needed. No other party had edited the page.

Response to Doncram's evidence

Doncram gives WP:Articles for deletion/Sons of Haiti as an example of a kept article I nominated. At nomination, there was no assertion of notability. Doncram's ES on creation was start article toward moving discussion from Talk:Washington Hall (Seattle, Washington).

Another is Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/United States Forest Service Architecture Group: while he states it was kept, the close was "No consensus", and the completely-reworked article that was kept was Architects of the United States Forest Service. The discussion determined there was no such "historic department within the United States Forest Service", despite Doncram's claims.

Doncram doesn't mention other AfD/CSDs, such as 08/2012's Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sons of Norway Building (Minneapolis, Minnesota), which states while I haven't searched for or found significant coverage, I do expect that documentation about this building exists, and 04/2011's Majestic Hotel (Dubai), tagged A7 by Orlady, created with ES start article to support its listing on Majestic Hotel dab page, meeting dab rules -- the listing on the dab page came first, then an attempt to support the listing, rather than creating the article and then adding it to the list. This ties in to his history of creating articles from database dumps, which hasn't been an issue lately. In 12/2010, James Wetmore (disambiguation) was speedied by Tassedethe as an Obviously unnecessary disambiguation page.

In his section "My works routinely withstand AFDs oppositions of Orlady, SarekOfVulcan", he lists Walter Mickle Smith, Fram-nominated; Orlady argued Keep, which isn't "opposition", and Natchez Trace (band), Orlady-nominated, Deleted, which isn't "withstanding".

Creating disambiguation pages before the articles

On 4/25/2009, Doncram created Ripley Historic District as a dabpage, and then created Ripley Historic District (Ripley, Mississippi) to settle Ripley Historic District disambig page. Until the middle of this case, it read Ripley Historic District in Ripley, Mississippi includes something built in 1837. It was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 2005.

On 12/25/2012, Doncram created a disambig page for Allee House, with redlinks for Allee House (Dutch Neck Crossroads, Delaware) and Jesse J. and Mary F. Allee House, along with a See Also to still-redlinked Allee Site. He then created the Dutch Neck Crossroads article, and made some related edits, before leaving to work on List of Presbyterian Churches. Senator2029 came along and tagged Allee House for WP:CSD#G6, explaining on Doncram's talk that it was tagged as an orphaned disambig page. Doncram removed the speedy tag, contrary to policy, pointing out on talk that it didn't meet the criteria listed on his talkpage. He then added bluelinks to Allee House, with the ES add supporting bluelinks for two items. See MOS:DABRL for how this works, if you don't know. (TheCatalyst31 created an article for the other Allee House later that day.)

Related to this, see the creation of the Chambers Building disambig page, as well as its current state. I still find it improbable that some of those articles belong in that list.

Response to lvklock's evidence

lvklock gives Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disambiguation/Archive 13#what is wp:NRHP doing wrong RE disambiguation? as an example of Doncram working out disambiguation for NRHP listings, but it reads to me like a lot of editors telling Doncram "no you're doing it wrong", until Doncram finally says (in effect) "thanks for all your input I'm doing it my way anyway".

BRD interpretation

In the Archive760 discussion, Doncram claims that my revert didn't count as the R in BRD because I didn't have "standing established" and I should "show deference to what the content editor already present is doing".

In an unblock request from 05/2011, Doncram claims that since he was adding material and I (and another editor) were deleting it, his re-additions weren't undoing another editor's work: we were just interrupting his work.

Current word length: 972; diff count: 24.

Doncram writes short stubs that don't give context to the reader

• Discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive223#Topic ban proposal re NRHP stubs (April 2011)
• Discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive224#Doncram NHRP stubs (May/June 2011); consensus was that creation of stubs is disruptive and excessive use of verbatim quotes violates the non-free content criteria, but no consensus for any action
• Sherman House (Batesville, Indiana) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) currently reads "The Sherman House in Batesville, Indiana is a restaurant and hotel that dates from 1852."
• Dexter Universalist Church (Dexter, New York) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (two sentences)

Doncram publishes incomplete drafts of articles to mainspace

• List of Presbyterian churches in the United States (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), which as of today still contains un-tableized entries, blank rows, and many saying "founded built NRHP-listed" with no dates
• Apparently I broke Doncram's edit-lock on the list of Presbyterian churches - edit summary "to Elkman, you are not aware of hidden list of NRHPs still being merged in. Striking the Stewart memorial one off that hidden list, thanks for your little bit of help"
• List of Catholic churches in the United States (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), which as of today contains a large number in the "Unsorted" section
• List of Congregational churches (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) -- Fram ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) moved it to userspace at this version, then Doncram moved it back without changes

Doncram includes long verbatim quotes from other sources

• Soo Line Depot (Wilton, North Dakota) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) - as of today, one of the four sentences is directly taken from the NRHP nomination document
• Andrew Crockett House (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) - this revision contains three verbatim quotes from the NRHP nomination document, even though they could be paraphrased, summarized, and/or synthesized into the article. (Also, a "build date" listed of 1821 is actually Andrew Crockett's date of death.)
• First Parish Unitarian Universalist Church of Scituate (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) - Doncram got this warning for copying text from the parish web site, and he protested the warning until it was pointed out to him that someone else added the copyvio. The copyvio wasn't directly his fault, but more careful attention to sources would have revealed the problem.

Orlady and Doncram have significant negative interactions

• Doncram says, "As you know fully well Orlady, I do resent your following and criticizing." (December 2012)
• Another edit at List of Methodist churches (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views): Doncram alleges that Orlady has expressed long-term harassment and bullying, and refuses mediation. (December 2012)
• Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive776#User:Doncram is deciding who can and can't participate in an RFC on a WikiProject talk page - discussion started by this edit in which Doncram removed a comment from Orlady, in regard to a third person's excessive use of images, and stating, "I utterly resent an editor who has long tangled with me butting in here to complicate matters, commenting directly after me." (November 2012)
• [1] - null edit with the summary "big f deal, someone following and arguably harassing finds an edit to make that i obviously woulda gotten to, working down the list. result of a past editing error copying table format i think. big f deal." (See the comment about publishing incomplete drafts to mainspace)
• Ambrose Whittlesey House (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) - Orlady and Doncram edit-warred over a "whosequote" template at [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] -- I finally stepped in and edited the article to remove the quoted text. (I really dislike this sort of edit war when, with an easily available source, the problem can be fixed.)
• Doncram removed a comment from Orlady at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sons of Norway Building (Minneapolis, Minnesota) ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nyttend and Doncram have negative interactions

• Doncram uses the edit summary "Use your words, don't be an idiotic non-person, please" when referring to Nyttend (December 2012)
• Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2013 January 4 - Doncram demanded the restoration of Old Union School (Chesterville, Ohio) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), twice deleted by Nyttend
  • And then Doncram edit-warred with SarekOfVulcan regarding the closure: [7] [8] [9] [10] (January 4, 2013, resulting in a 24-hour block for Doncram)
• Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive780#Doncram and NPA - Nyttend is requesting a WP:NPA block for Doncram, with lists of recent evidence (January 2013)

Doncram has accused me of inaccuracy, and in effect, lying

• I created Isabella Ranger Station (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) while visiting the Minnesota Historical Society SHPO, using the actual nomination form. Doncram then made this change saying "drop probably false assertion in infobox that architects included CCC; assert more plausibly that design was by Architects of the United States Forest Service." (I think I would have noticed a statement about specific architects if I was at the SHPO working right from the form.) This debate at WP:AN ensued, where Doncram said that even though I wasn't deliberately telling a mistruth, I could have potentially been putting in inaccurate information, and that I had the responsibility of fixing the infobox generator. (Apparently, this would have involved using data that isn't there.) He also told me that I was making unsubstantiated edits to the Isabella Ranger Station article.
• When I created Floyd B. Olson House (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), I specified that it had a build date of 1922. The National Register database said 1922, Larry Millett's book said 1922, and the Minneapolis Heritage Preservation Commission said 1922. But, Doncram asserted (see this copy/paste of his statement): "From what you say here, plus informed understanding of how the NRIS database works, it appears the "built=1922" assertion in the article is incorrect. Rather, the house was likely built earlier but is significant for its association during 1922-1936 with notable person Floyd B. Olson. If i were Elkman, I would rant on and on about how terrible it is that an erroneous assertion has been out there in Wikipedia since 2008." After confirming with another source that it was built in 1922, Doncram said, "Okay, great, good. I thought Elkman was confessing to having relied upon imprecise information in a mainspace article, as the article then and now shows no other source for the built=1922 interpretation of NRIS, but I stand corrected. Or Elkman lucked out in this case that assuming the NRIS info meant built turns out to be the case (usually a pretty good bet)."
• In a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places/Archive 49#George F. Barber, Doncram used my name six times to justify his creation of thin stubs about architects, claiming that my "article generator" doesn't know the difference between an architect and a builder. First: My code generates infoboxes, not complete articles. Second: I can't find information in that database saying who is an architect or who is a builder, because that information is not there. Third: My database tools have no bearing on whether writes an incomplete stub or a decent article.

Apparently, I'm a contributor to an attack page because I fix articles

• Doncram cites User:Orlady/List ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) as an attack page, and cites me as an attack editor. I edited Boyd Mill Ruins (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), and someone else noticed that I edited BOC Site (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), Villa Bella Vista (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), and Jonathan Warner House (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), therefore marking them as complete for the list.

And this apparently makes me an attack editor.

Current word length: 1190; diff count: 104.

Doncram is capable/productive contributor whose zeal leads to creating content with serious deficiencies w/r/t policy and good sense. His tendencies to personalize and reject constructive content criticism and attack critics of his work have led to disruption ( like editors quitting). He is convinced (without basis in reality) that I conduct an obsessive campaign against him; has persistently attacked me, calling me "evil", "hateful", etc.; and announced in content discussions that my comments merely reflect my animus toward him.

Issues and behaviors of concern have existed for a long time

• March2009: Doncram called me his "personal nemesis" and posted talk-page "disclaimers" about me
• October-November2010 article naming discussion, involving Blueboar, Sarek, Doncram, Clariosophic, and me, bruised egos and inflated minor question. On Doncram's talk page, I suggested -- supported by Blueboar -- that he refrain from personal attack on Sarek; Doncram deleted conversation.

Doncram takes comments about content too personally; misinterprets; over-reacts

• Described Orlady post ( context) as "threat" to "waste ...time" or "bully [him] into slavish action".
• 07/05/11 - defensive wall of words over note on content, followed by more defensiveness, personal attack
• Attacked my AFD comment, although I supported his position.
• Protested copyvio notification.

Walls of words on talk pages aren't effective communication

Lengthy comments inhibit communication or elicit excessive response: [11], [12], [13]; [14], [15]

Doncram apparently feels he's targeted for persecution

• 29/04/2011 - Doncram complains about Sarek's AFD, RM, and other initiatives, suggesting it's wrong to start such discussions, and that content discussions are "about [him]".
• Creating pages to avoid "shadow" of "long-term following editor": [16]
• Complained to Jimbo, alleging editors focused on harassment ( archived discussion)

Doncram won't accept consensus of WP:AN discussion

June 2011 WP:AN discussion closed with consensus on: excessive verbatim quotes, disruptiveness of Doncram's "sub-stubs", and authorization for other users to excise or userfy this content when encountered. Examples of Doncram's rejection of this:

• Sarek's "Move-warring over incomplete articles"
• Elkman's "Doncram includes long verbatim quotes from other sources"
• I hid excessive verbatim quotation; Doncram restored it with edit summaries that (misleadingly) say only "add".
• Edit-warred against consensus at List of round barns: Nyttend userfied this version, Doncram restored before making additional edits: [17]- [18]
• Continues adding non-information to articles: [19] (item added is now external link)
• Ntsimp cleaned up stub to address identified concerns; much later Doncram reverted cleanup; summary says article had been edited during "witch-hunt".

Doncram has been persistent in personal attacks against me

• During confusing, difficult December2010 RFD (Doncram, Orlady, Sarek collaborated positively), called me "intentionally negative", "personally biased"
• In June2011 WP:AN, Doncram called me bad names; accused me of wikihounding: Diff1, Diff2, Diff3, Diff4, Diff5, Diff6, Diff7, Diff8, Diff9, Diff10, Diff 11, Diff 12, Diff 13, Diff 14, Diff 15. Finding the experience upsetting, I reviewed our statements there to see if my behavior was as bad as implied, and found my comments comparatively mild -- particularly considering his incitement: Diff1, Diff2, Diff3, Diff4, Diff5, Diff 6, Diff7, Diff8, Diff 9, Diff 10, Diff 11, Diff 12.
• cited by others
• My WP:AN post describes AFD comment removal
• Doncram's first comment on November2012 AfD is gratuitous attack, later he called my comment "total crap", dissed my other work, continued attacking

Doncram has painted a false portrait of my behavior

One issue is history of conflict between Doncram and me. I feel his frequent repetition of allegations of wikihounding, hatefulness, bullying, evil, etc., has damaged my Wikipedia reputation; some of the community "knows" allegations are true because they are repeated so often. I believe the negative portrait he painted for the last 4+ years was almost entirely the product of his imagination, although I freely admit (and have told him) that the abuse I endured from him caused me to dislike him -- and that I've contended with him at times when I found fault with his work.

I trace his perception of an Orlady vendetta to August 2008, when I reviewed Doncram's featured list nomination (I was then a frequent FL reviewer). He responded with wall of words that rejected almost everything I said and used my name 5 times (focusing on the person rather than the content). I replied briefly. He responded constructively to one of my comments, then abandoned the FL nomination.

Another apparent key event, later in 2008: Doncram was offended that I changed part of article title to lowercase, per MOS, and started WP:RM discussion. Discussion was mostly contrary to his view; he closed the move discussion himself and moved the article to his preferred title with long comment indicating why he thought his opinion was correct even if it didn't follow consensus, and more defense on his talk page after I questioned him. Several months later, at my RFA he cited that discussion as evidence of my "following him", "not budging", and "obstinacy ... out of line with reason." That was misrepresentation; considering how he terminated the RM discussion, the obstinate person who wasn't budging was Doncram.

October2008 AfD mentioned in his evidence likely contributed to his views on me. (I still believe topic fails WP:GNG.)

In June2011 WP:AN, he listed 7 talk-page discussions as evidence of my misdeeds. To me, they are evidence that he complained about me.

Doncram indifferent to policy: Still complaining that Orlady is mean to sockpuppets

In March2009, Doncram criticized me -- and tried to have me restricted -- for my efforts against banned user's sockpuppets. I thought this was ancient history and that he knows that I followed policy, but now he's saying banned user "was rightly aggrieved about bad treatment".

Pre-emptive disambiguation caused some edits cited as disruptive

Doncram creates many pages to support well-intentioned disambiguation pages, often pre-emptively: [20], [21], [22]. Examples of "sub-stubs" and other articles cited as contentious that he created for pre-emptive disambiguation:

• Edit summary indicates Doncram's work at Majestic Hotel led to creating the speedy-deleted Majestic Hotel (Dubai) that Sarek cites and Hotel Majestic (San Francisco) (minimal stub, sourced only to hotel website) "to resolve an issue at Hotel Majestic dab page".
• Created Sherman House (Batesville, Indiana) (cited by Elkman as short stub without context) after another user added it to disambiguation page. Edit summary says "starter article to settle entry by another editor at Sherman House disambiguation. seems notable, this is a stub."
• John Hunter House (Franklin, Tennessee), mentioned by me above, was created "to support ...disambig".
• Started Fairbanks and Birmingham, Alabama Masonic Temple articles (cited by MSJapan as "article creation for the sake of creation") when developing Masonic Temple (disambiguation); edit summaries state: "Masonic building article start, towards removing one issue regarding redlink items, out of a big mess".

Rebuttals and responses

Prehistory of that "Forest Service architects" AFD cited by Doncram

• Article as I found it was about nonexistent organization, hadn't been edited in 7 weeks; Hike395 had expressed concerns on Talk page
• I edited and moved it; Doncram reverted move 27 minutes later and edited; several more edits by me: [23], [24], [25]; then edits by Doncram: [26], [27].
• Talk page discussion ensued
• Sarek moved list to talk page
• AFD started after talk page discussion didn't resolve issues

Doncram says I have persistently refused mediation

He didn't show evidence. I searched to see what he was referring to, and reconstructed history of the three situations when he suggested mediation: (Note: some of these are long diffs covering many other topics)

1. 3Feb2009 Doncram request; 4Feb2009 Orlady reply; 5Feb2009 Doncram response; more
2. 17Dec2009 Doncram request; 18Dec2009 Orlady reply
3. 13April2011 Doncram request; 13April2011 Doncram repeat; 14April2011 Doncram repeat; 14April2011 Doncram complaint; 16April2011 Orlady reply; 16April2011 Doncram response

   22April2011 Doncram request; 22April2011 Doncram addition; 22April2011 Orlady reply

   4May2011 Doncram complaint; 4May2011 Orlady reply

In hindsight, I see that Doncram requested mediation because he interprets our conflicts as one long interpersonal dispute; I refused because I saw them only as series of individually inconsequential content issues, usually with other participants already supplying "third opinions".

Other rebuttals on talk page

• "Attack pages", Clausen, The Devil's Advocate evidence, Doncram evidence, Lvklock evidence.

Current word length: 67; diff count: 1.

Creation of short stubs is compliant with policy

It is explicit editing policy that articles may be started as a weak draft "Even poor articles, if they can be improved, are welcome." This form of words has been in place since 19 Feb 2009 when it replaced a similar exhortion, "submission of rough drafts should also be encouraged as much as possible." The guideline WP:STUB states that "Any registered editor may start a stub article."

Current word length: 383; diff count: 2.

Article creation for the sake of creation

The majority of articles in List of Masonic buildings in the United States were created by Doncram, and this initial diff for the building in Fairbanks, Alaska is typical of the initial content as is this on a building in Alabama, and in that case, Don didn't even bother to find out the building had been destroyed in 1996; someone else had to do that. The Fairbanks article two years later is this. In short, there are many articles created as stubs by Don which no one can expand; [28], [29], [30], and [31] are further examples. All they say after years of being on WP is that these buildings exist and are on the NRHP registry.

Don also created a stub based on the fact that a building was NRHP-eligible, but was not listed due to owner objection [32]. He clearly indicates that it was not listed, was unsure how to handle it, but created it anyway.

Part of Don's argument on the Sons of Haiti AfD was "I don't necessarily have time or interest to develop this a lot myself, but here are some pieces of information." This comment was made October 7, 2010. The article's history shows Don created the article on October 6, 2010. If Don had "no interest in developing an article" not 24 hours after creating it, why did he create it? Perhaps to claim that he was a great WP contributor for creating articles, as he does on his userpage?

As a counterpoint, many of the actually decent articles in the Masonic building area are created and actively worked on by other people. The above articles started out at least twice as long as anything Don stubbed. MSJapan ( talk) 19:38, 13 January 2013 (UTC) reply

Violation of "existence is not notability"

The vast majority of Masonic building article stubs created by Doncram are based solely on their NRHP listing, not article expandability or availability of sources. In many cases, there are no sources available to say any more than what the NRHP entry does. MSJapan ( talk) 00:05, 19 January 2013 (UTC) reply

Focusing on particular individuals when consensus is larger than them

Don is overly focused on Orlady and Sarek as instigators of issues. However, the AfDs he has posted in his evidence section (and which I will therefore not repost) will also show that others were also against Don's point of view on many issues, and this is much larger than a person vs. person issue. MSJapan ( talk) 19:56, 17 January 2013 (UTC) reply

Current word length: 45; diff count: 0.

Many believe that a NRHP listing establishes defacto notability

The question of whether being listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) is sufficient to establish notability has come up in a number of discussions, [33] [34] [35] [36] often at AfD [37]. The argument that a NRHP listings is sufficient to establish notability has usually been successful [38] [39].

Current word length: 684; diff count: 14.

See the first section of the current version of WP:BOTR, where Doncram is repeatedly arguing against relevant consensus, posting massive statements, and objecting (e.g. "I really hate") when people tell him TLDR on those statements. This is an example of why Doncram's actions are the problem here; he doesn't appear to have had any previous disputes on microformats or with Pigsonthewing, but he's nevertheless becoming quite tendentious by actions that cause others to go crazy. His actions have caused others to quit the project in disgust, such as Dudemanfellabra, as well as the point to which he drove Elkman in the comments at the very top of this diff. Despite blocks for editwarring and personal attacks, he repeatedly editwars (see the page that Dudeman links) and makes numerous violations of WP:NPA, as seen at 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8. He even accuses someone of making false statements and two hours later says "it is not true that I accused you of lying there". This is nowhere near a recent issue; Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Doncram shows that many of these problems, including WP:NPA and WP:EW, have been around for 3+ years.

I did go too far in a few deletions, but realising that I went too far is why I've self-reverted my deletions at Old Union School (Chesterville, Ohio) and several related articles, and that's why I'll not perform similar deletions in the future. Beyond that, there's nothing different in my actions from what others would do and have done. Ryan's perspective is heavily influenced by recent events — specifically, Doncram reraising multiple issues with me recently and not reraising multiple issues with other editors. The links in my original statement (convenience links: here, an extended block for issues that have continued; here, disputes on Indian castes; Doncram not caring when others tell him that he's made "blatantly wrong" factual errors, and most recently, angrily responding to someone questioning his empty request for arbitration) are largely sufficient. Doncram sometimes doesn't even pause long enough to avoid other factual errors: when I removed some images from Indiana bridge articles citing WP:FILE, he says that I'm violating WP:OWN on Ohio articles (everyone familiar with the USA will notice the difference between Indiana and Ohio easily as long as they're paying a little attention) and states that this page (then a redirect to here) was nonexistent. Factual errors aren't necessarily a big issue, but attacking others and editwarring based on those errors (see here, where the only reason that the warring stopped is that I realised where we were going and decided to stop) is inexcusable. He continues to attack others even here at arbitration, suggesting in his statement (which goes past the maximum length; another massive statement like at WP:BOTR) that numerous people are really just bullying him, and saying that I've been dehumanising him (no links or other evidence, so in violation of WP:WIAPA point #5), which ironically comes from the person who freely calls someone else an idiotic non-person who is "dedicated to disruption and hatred and so on".

Almost everywhere Doncram goes, conflicts happen. Is he an innocent party who's constantly finding people who hate him, or are his actions the reason that these conflicts happen? Occam's razor is correct here. Ending these actions by Doncram won't magically bring peace to the Wikipedia galaxy, but it will contribute to peace everywhere that he's going right now. Doncram's been a helpful contributor in some places, and he's definitely helping in some ways now, so I would urge some sort of tightly-worded restrictions prohibiting actions for which he's been blocked in the past (e.g. NPA, edit-warring, dumping databases into Wikipedia without discernment) and permitting long blocks, and I specifically ask that he not be sitebanned. Nyttend ( talk) 19:22, 16 January 2013 (UTC) reply

Housekeeping — I'm not sure how the no-subpages rule at WP:AC/P is applied to my links such as " 1" above. If you don't permit them, just ignore those links — I don't know how better to cite the issues contained therein, so I'd simply remove them and we'd end up in the same spot as if you'd ignored them.

Current word length: 3030; diff count: 29.

I care and have done more than anyone about data quality and sourcing for NRHP articles

I create works that provide value to readers directly and that serve indirect purposes.

I have provided comprehensive coverage in geographic areas: most of Syracuse, New York NRHPs (2008), most of Connecticut NRHPs (2010), all of North Dakota NRHPs (2011), all of Utah County, Utah NRHPs (2012) and in other areas.

I've created dozens of topical item lists, e.g. List of Masonic buildings jump-started with NRHP-listed items.

I've invented and/or implemented key features of the NRHP list-article system. The system to be featured in the September 2012 Wikipedia-Loves-Monuments photo contest. I developed the list-article format and created NRHP color templates. I provided feedback and invented features for Elkman's off-wiki NRHP infobox generator and for the NRHP infobox template. I recruited editor Dudemanfellabra to refine the infobox template.

During 2008-2009 I created most of 3,400 NRHP disambiguation pages, solving contention that used to take place when competing articles for the same topic name were created, or contention about disambiguation pages' existence. Orlady names "pre-emptive disambiguation" a problem in the Workshop page. This was almost all done in 2009 and has wholly solved the previous problems.

I developed the NRIS database info issues system. This allows new and experienced editors to use local knowledge of apparent NRIS database issues in articles rationally, and for central management and data correction on the NRIS system itself.

I think noone else who has done more in actual article editing and corrections, supporting systems development, and in other work to develop the NRHP article system in wikipedia.

Orlady's unpleasantness dates from 2008, is vast in scope, and is deeply incivil

Orlady spat out accusation of "intellectual sloppiness", I moderately but clearly objected on behalf of many. Orlady reiterated the general insult. Orlady has repeatedly since scoffed at idea of community and demonstrated willingness to destroy community. Following that, valued editor Appraiser and others dropped out. Orlady repeated the "intellectually sloppy" accusation in Featured List review about List of NHLs in NY, which Failed. That and Orlady's "Oppose" and other remarks, convinced me that further work on bringing lists to featured status would be unpleasant due to Orlady's participation and expectation Orlady would not go away, and I dropped the program. Only three NRHP lists since have been brought to Featured List review. Alabama NHLs's feature review, nomination by Altairisfar, list-article by Altairisfar and me, promoted January 2009. Discussion included Orlady's opposition to promotion eventually stricken, my noting "overstatements and unnecessary dismissiveness in Orlady's comments" (which I explained), and comment by another to Altairisfar to try to ignore such "bickering". I contributed significantly in Featured review 1 and Featured review 2, and to its linked NHL articles in between, for January 2010 promotion of List of NHLs in IN. While these two were promoted I believe they were elsewhere described as unpleasant experiences. List of NHLs in MI was promoted in January 2012. It remains striking that WikiProject NRHP with [ 2,780 lists] has only 3 ever reaching Featured status; salient explanation is the unpleasantness in the New York and Alabama reviews permanently turning me and others off. NRHP editors turned to developing the NRHP list-articles all to a lesser standard (including table-izing them), and adding photos, and building disambiguation, and engaging in other editing campaigns where a single opponent could not have an effective veto.

Other unpleasantness includes Orlady's RFA, where I opposed based based on bullying-type behavior towards others and me, and where some others agreed with my view. It includes contention of editor Polaron on NRHP list-articles in Connecticut, which I raised and addressed basically constructively. I spoke on the phone with Polaron and got agreement to invite a mediator, we obtained . Orlady followed in, and basically played a spoiler to an agreement that was working and despite O's interventions and ridicule, basically did work. At one point Polaron accepted an edit restriction and at another was blocked, but edited under a sockpuppet account while blocked, and I was astounded to see Orlady prop Polaron up, brushing over the severe violations. It was pretty clearly favoring a rogue editor, and like many other incidents, Orlady seemed predictably to be entering a) because I was involved, b) on the side of opposing me. Orlady followed to a new area, Davenport NRHPs, and went to 4RR, in an embarassing situation in front of a new editor. Orlady followed me a zillion times, and is predictably opposed, is predictably extending contention and floating new complaints. Sometimes others find something to agree with, and don't see the longer pattern and why I would object to Orlady's new complaint. The modus operandi for Orlady is not as direct as SarekOfVulcan's outright confrontations, it is often couched to seem reasonable to an uninvolved person out of context later, but it is predictably negative and/or complicating and is deeply incivil.

Orlady has repeatedly expressed dislike for NRHP articles, yet either follows my contributions or directly searches for phrases I have used: [Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive223 "...I have no interest in the vast majority of the topics about which he has created his ridiculous stubs; my interest is in ensuring that these deficient articles don't remain in article space in their dreadful condition (and I've discovered many of them by searching on peculiar text strings)...."],

Archived Talk of one Tennessee NRHP topic ran from April 2010 to May 2011. Within it Orlady simply does not reply to requests for mediation, and in my view (which i explained) lied and misrepresented, and was generally horrid.

Orlady's blithe suggestion in Evidence here, and similar suggestions sometimes by others, are that I am misunderstanding, that Orlady is not incivil, that X is a valid arguable point, miss the point. The timing and persistence and nature of Orlady's comments, make for the deep inciviility. Consider, if you know that you are perceived as vindictive and negative and hateful by a given editor, and if you yourself acknowledge that what you say would be disbelieved by that editor, why would you continue and continue and continue. If there is some mild question or issue about content, let it be carried by someone else. You convey disrespect and more by continuing. I myself have walked away from situations where another editor came to perceive me as compromised or too-negative (e.g. in the Evidence here, case about an editor's removing multiple photos from NRHP articles). I apologized for coming across too strong, and left it for other NRHP editors to comment (which they did, largely in agreement with my concern). Orlady, instead, would hammer and hammer and seek to extend and complicate and extend and extend. Seemingly to drag me down, seemingly to assert right to criticize above all other considerations, seemingly deeply incivil. If it looks incivil, why insist on doing again and again; that needs to be stopped by this arbitration.

Orlady maintains two attack pages

I've always experienced two pages Orlady created in April and June 2011 as attack pages and have been discouraged every time they've been invoked, bludgeon-like, and yet not speedy-removed by observing administrators under Template:Db-g10 or similar. When this arbitration was nearly underway, this MFD on one, started, though result (1/17/2013) was Keep. This is not adequate. The prevailing argument among Orlady and few discussants (none being regular NRHP members AFAIK) was optimistic but contrary to the nature and usage of the page, as if it were a useful cleanup worklist created for WikiProject NRHP. However WikiProject NRHP was not notified, did not participate, and IMO there is no precedent or interest by the wikiproject to take on such a single-editor-focused negative campaign.

1) User:Orlady/List, the MFDd one, is solely focussed on allegedly inadequate articles started by me, with criticisms that I mostly disagree with. It was created during SarekOfVulcan-initiated [ April 2011 ANI "Topic ban proposal re NRHP stubs"] and expanded since by Orlady. To some extent I accepted its existence, as it conceivably could (and did) bring some editors to the otherwise obscure North Dakota NRHP article area I was then developing. And, while it was clearly a negative environment for me, I saw some potential it could serve as a forum where adversaries could possibly be comfortable to actually talk out some specifics, away from ANI. I brought it to this July 23, 2011 version, but all my comments were dismissed, and almost all were hatted by Orlady ( "Recollapsed.... Please note that this is MY user space, NOT Doncram's"), and since. It thus would not serve as a real discussion forum serving WikiProject NRHP goals, and couldn't attract most NRHP editors. Just six editors have participated there (Orlady, Ntsimp, Station1, Elkman, Polaron, Choess).

It's been used as a weapon by Orlady:

• January 4, 2013 DeletionReview,
• July 2012 ANI,
• this 7 July 2012 AutoPatrol request, a few days after I returned from 6 month block (Orlady goal achieved in next edit, in response)
• December 2011 kerfluffle at Talk:Frederick G. Clausen (which also invoked other hate page)
• August 2011 ANI,
• July 2011 AN
• June 2011 AN
• April 2011 AN.

It's also linked from participant Choess's To-Do-List, and in two invitations by Orlady:

• July 2011 requesting SandyGeorgia's involvement (who did not respond), and
• this 13 June 2011 general invitation to NRHP editors.

None of 24 longtime NRHP editors identified by Lvklock in the opening of its discussion subsection (nor omitted Kumioko and Andrew Jameson), accepted. The invitations appear to have attracted only Elkman, non-NRHP-member Polaron (long involved in contention over Connecticut redirects and articles), and Ntsimp (who had just self-identified as not having started a single NRHP article). IMO, WikiProject NRHP considered and effectively replied it was not interested in joining the hate page.

Above are all usages found by What links here, plus the autopatrol request which I personally recalled and thus could find.

N.B. I eventually noticed the January 6 MFD but this arbitration was already then opening.

2) User:Orlady/words, created 8 June 2011 and left as this, updated December 2012 to noindex. Within this arbitration, it was identified as flagrant wp:POLEMIC violation in Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Doncram#Statement by The Devil's Advocate. It was then blanked by Jehochman, and built back out by Orlady revising and finally “courtesy blanking”. The long-stable version was a self-serving selection, with every phrase grotesquely out of context. It's been invoked by Orlady in

• June 2011 AN (scroll down)
• December 2011 kerfluffle at Talk:Frederick G. Clausen (which also invoked other hate page)
• July 2012 ANI
• December 2012 ANI

It also was referenced at 18 August 2012 by cbl62 without disapproval of Orlady and with criticism of me in fact.

Those are all linked usages besides from this arbitration.

I explained in “reply to horrifying statement by Orlady” in recent ANI that just-invoked one was an attack page; discussion was left off as not appropriate for ANI resolution and that arbitration was obviously needed.

By their nature and usage, they are Wikipedia:Attack pages.

My works routinely withstand AFDs oppositions of Orlady, SarekOfVulcan

All items found in search of AFDs involving me and them, where there was opposition between us (articles created by me unless noted otherwise):

• AFD: List of OBCs and List of SCs, Orlady-nominated; Kept
• AFD: List of SCs, (2nd nomination), Orlady-nomination; Kept
• November 2012 AFD: List of Methodist churches Orlady-nominated; Kept
• Sept 2012 AFD:engineer Walter Mickle Smith, Fram-nominated; Orlady argued Keep but that article creation was “premature”; Kept
• July 2012 AFD: 14 articles on wrought-iron cross sites, SarekOfVulcan-nominated; Kept all
• Dec 2011 AFD:architects Helfensteller etc, Orlady argued Userfy; Kept
• July 2011 AFD:WPA architecture, Orlady argued “delete or userfy”, Kept
• July 2011 AFD:architects of the USFS, Orlady-nominated; Kept
• July 2011 AFD:Mississippi Masonic building, Orlady argued "merger"; Kept
• AFD:John W. Ross, 7 May 2011, SarekOfVulcan-nominated, Orlady sought "userfy"; Kept. (One where I asked SarekOfVulcan if this was a “false proposal”.)
• April 2011 AFD:Iowa Masonic building, SarekOfVulcan argued Delete; Kept
• October 2010 AFD:Sons of Haiti, SarekOfVulcan-nominated; Orlady argued Delete; Kept
• June 2010 AFD:List of Masonic buildings; not created but eventually and reluctantly adopted by Doncram; Blueboar-nominated; Orlady arguing Delete; Kept
• April 2010 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Natchez Trace (band), Orlady-nominated, Deleted
• Feb 2010 The Cathcart and 3 other articles, Orlady expanded AFD opened by another to add 2 articles created and one recently edited by me. I had removed prods and explained at Talk, Feb 2010, Kept
• Sept 2009 Downtown Hartford Polaron-created, Doncram-nominated, Orlady defended article; discussion included topics of lying and following. Kept, with closer commenting "'unfinished' is not a reason for deletion". I objected to undue coverage of 8 NRHP historic districts; combo article seemingly created to block normal redlinks and creation process for them; I eventually created their 8 separate articles and reduced undue coverage in the neighborhood article.
• March 2009 New Rochelle cemetery, Kept
• October 2008 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/National Register of Historic Places featured properties and districts, Orlady-nominated. Back-and-forth about personal attacks and other behavior. Summary by me:

My comment here was that you had made overstatements (and/or false statements) in arguing your case, not that there weren't arguments along the same lines that would have been more correct. A loaded term for this, which i have seen applied elsewhere in an offensive manner that I do mean to convey here, could be "sloppiness". Using overstatements and inaccurate statements in an effort to get an article deleted, to me tends to suggest the possibility that something is not right, that the deletion nominator has chosen one side and is committed to arguing it, right or wrong, rather than participating in good faith. I am attuned to this issue due to your edit summaries and talk page justifications of other reverts of my work that you have done, an issue which I have raised to you at your Talk page. The issue here is not whether there is or is not a kernel of a valid point in something in what you say, but rather it is in how you are saying it and seeming to pursue something resembling an attack. If there is a continuing pattern, then this set of statements might be used as evidence some other wikipedia process. Anyhow, I am choosing to label these mistatements, here, as what I see they are: mischaracterizations that suited your argument. It would help if you would disavow such tactics and perhaps apologize; you could do that simply without abandoning your argument....

Kept.

SarekOfVulcan has engaged in excessively combative editing, eschewing less combative options

For example, at dozens or perhaps hundreds of valuable NRHP articles created or developed by me during 2011, SarekOfVulcan followed and often contended within a few minutes. In general I tried often to open discussion at Talk about any possible issue, though I gradually tried less, because SarekOfVulcan would either not reply or would only reply rudely with comments like "CIR" (competence is required), where SarekOfVulcan assumed/believed i must be wrong, many/most cases turning out that SarekOfVulcan's assumption was wrong. SarekOfVulcan has many times opened AFDs or ANI reports or other escalations, without discussion of substance. For example ANI report mid-2012, after I returned from 6 month block, where SarekOfVulcan turned out to be completely wrong in every complaint. Orlady typically tried to extend/expand the ANI's scope. I raised this ANI at Jimbo Wales' Talk page, and appropriately Jimbo responded indirectly by supporting a main editor mediating, who sought to limit the scope. By the sheer repetition of charges at ANI, which I view as quite a flawed forum for substantial discussion, SarekOfVulcan has dragged me down.

Orlady and SarekOfVulcan have engaged in longterm behaviors fairly called bullying and harrassment

Somewhat developed in others' statements, this is crux of issues. Orlady at ANI-incidents and notice-boards has typically specialized in seconding any negative assertion and then expanding scope of contention (in this arbitration, seconding SarekOfVulcan's assertion that disambiguation pages are a problem). SarekOfVulcan typically is careless in bringing up factually wrong or misleading assertions (in this arbitration, criticizing a merger edit for being incomplete that was completed 6 minutes later, and is nonsensical to discuss). SarekOfVulcan or other bringing up "Doncram at it again" on incorrect basis; Orlady following with expansion.

Orlady has been deeply incivil in a good number of discussions, including by asserting plagiarism and never retracting such false claims:

• Orlady calls doncram “lazy and plagiaristic” and Here Orlady reiterates, rather than apologizes for, such false accusation of plagiarism, at Charles L. Thompson brouhaha. I don't accept any distinction for Orlady morphing to term "plagiaristic" instead: the serious accusation there was that of plagiarism, whether a source was given adequate credit or not, and clearly an explicit quote provides that.
• Here Orlady calls my work “grossly embarrassing”
• Orlady calls my work "obnoxious"
• likens my work to "dog crap"
• At my return to editing mid-2012 Orlady was immediately and repeatedly confrontational, and was insulting to a degree causing Jimbo Wales to remove Orlady's comment. Orlady again refined practice to be confrontational and insulting but not super-obviously within any one comment. It's a matter of continual refinement, what line of civility can be pushed.

Orlady, in the longer sweep, has been incivil by predictably encouraging parties advancing complaints (typically incorrect, non-policy-based IMO), and by predictably seeking to expand rather than contract the scope of each new contention. As Orlady has often not been blatantly incivil in wording within a given confrontation, occasionally a commentator (as here in this Arbitration) will assert Orlady is blameless. But it is the consistent biased and frequently hypocritical negative pressure in longer pattern that is cumulatively intolerable, clearly and deliberately and fundamentally mean-spirited and demeaning and dehumanizing of all of us here. -- do ncr am 23:55, 7 February 2013 (UTC) reply

Orlady has egged on several combative-type editors against me

Including Polaron during 2009, SarekOfVulcan during 2011, Nyttend's contentious editing during mid-2012, Sitush in late 2012. Orlady actually supported Polaron's return, rather than any consequence, when Polaron sock-puppeted to get around block.

Nyttend engages in too-strong ownership over Ohio and Indiana articles, and has misused admin tools

Documenting this, recent Deletion review where Nyttend protested vigorously but 14 redirects were restored. A related second Deletion Review, improperly closed IMHO by Nyttend], was subverted to lead to the article being userfied by SarekOfVulcan and improperly move-protecting it in userspace by SarekOfVulcan (i.e. enforcing a deletion). The combo of combative administrators has entirely subverted the second DRV process. This for an article for which consensus at DRV was emerging that it should not have been deleted and that it should be restored. -- do ncr am 22:26, 24 January 2013 (UTC) reply

Consequences of longterm attacking undermine Wikipedia in several ways that really do matter

Destruction of good initiatives involving NRHP community, of opportunity to use Wikimania in Washington constructively to engage NPS and NRHP Federal staff, of opportunity to address Protected Areas constructively with the executive director of the world-wide relevant organization who sought Wikipedia involvement. I would have to explain more about these. -- do ncr am 22:26, 24 January 2013 (UTC) reply

Current word length: 319; diff count: 4.

More on the Sons of Haiti

I think Sarek is misrepresenting the case on the Sons of Haiti. They are a national Masonic organisation with a reasonable amount of national chapters. They are covered in Masonic online sources that showed multiple presences, sources which Sarek has been aware of for years. The fact that it was nominated for deletion less than 24 hours http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Sons_of_Haiti&oldid=389140858 after creation] is in my opinion an abuse of process designed to strike early rather than allow the article to build up.

The fact that Sarek belongs to a Masonic tradition that regarded Sons of Haiti as "bogus" is in my opinion closely connected to this abuse of process.

We must remember that Sarek is part of this arbitration despite the naming of the request.

Update: Subsequently I've found out that Sarek suggested a Sons of Haiti article and suggested that this would be a better place to take the discussion on how "Masonic" they were. This makes it even less appropriate to launch an AFD within 24 hours. JASpencer ( talk) 16:18, 20 January 2013 (UTC) reply

Interaction between Sarek and Doncram seems to have started in October 2010

Looking at the talk pages there was no interaction with Sarek or mention of Sarek that I can find on Doncram's talk pages before October 2010. On Sarek's talk page there is one very civil interaction in Octber 2007 and one mention of Doncram by a third party in February 2010. The first substantial interaction between the two on their talk pages was on October 2010 when Sarek blocked User:Blueboar and User:Doncram for 48 hours.

It would be good to know when the parties think the interaction between the two did start, and why. Another editor has said that it was when Sarek was drawn into a dispute over Masonic buildings. Has this been the same as the dispute with Blueboar? (I found this reference).

I was interacting with Blueboar around this tie but I think that I was minimally involved in that dispute apart from in a couple of AFDs.

Current word length: 468; diff count: 34.

Interactions

• Most of the involved editors do very good work around here aside from this conflict. Doncram showed me the ropes at the NRHP project when I was a newbie. His enthusiasm gave me the energy to write and photograph the subjects for several hundred articles. Orlady has been very pleasant to work with on many occasions also. Although it might be better if she maintained more distance from Doncram's edits, her contributions are almost always helpful. Nyttend has some very valid points that should be heeded. Elkman also has a valid grievance, especially when it comes to the NRHP infobox generator that he created and maintains on his own website for us to use. SarekOfVulcan I don't know, if I'm correct he started getting involved with articles that Doncram edited following a conflict with him on masonic lodge articles.

• Although the current disagreements have been simmering for a long period of time (I was involved in this one during 2009), the bickering among the involved editors has reached a crescendo within the last year and a half. Doncram and I have strongly disagreed on some occasions. Doncram's primary fault, IMO, is a lack of willingness to compromise with others. However, I have seen an improvement in this, at least in his interactions with me. In my experience he is a valuable asset to Wikipedia and our NRHP project.

Following edits

• It appears that Doncram's edits have been followed on occasion, sometimes consistently, by one or more of the involved editors. It may amount to hounding, since it has definitely has caused him distress. One would have to be naive to believe that most of these were by chance. These are just a few examples, there are many more where these came from and most were made within minutes or hours of Doncrams edit(s): [40], [41], [42], [43], [44], [45], [46], [47], [48], [49], [50], [51], [52], [53], [54], [55], [56], [57], [58], [59], [60], [61], [62], [63], [64], [65], [66], [67], [68], [69], [70], [71], and [72]. I had never noticed Doncram getting upset or lashing out until he began verbalizing that several of the involved editors were closely following his editing and examining most of his wiki actions. The tweaks, deletions, reversions, page moves, and other fixes by the involved may have been technically justifiable, but they often seem to be at least somewhat provocative.

Stub creation

• Although Doncram continues to watched over with his stub creation, most of his recent articles that I have reviewed were sourced, had at least three or four lines of information, and were referenced. While the new ones are certainly not prefect, I have seen no further evidence of his old "sub-stub" creation since he came back from his block. Compare this Doncram article before it was moved to his user space and move protected.

Current word length: 40; diff count: 0.

User:Orlady/List was kept at MfD

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Orlady/List was closed as keep after the week long discussion. The closing admin stated " it seems clear that the purpose of the page is not to serve as an attack page, but to organise editing activities"

SarekOfVulcan and Doncram have engaged in edit warring

See [73], [74] [75] and [76].

Current word length: 411; diff count: 0.

doncram's article stubs are within policy, and helpful

According to WP:STUB stubs are valid articles: some articles will never develop beyond this point, many will, even if does not appear initially promising. Even unsourced stubs are useful is someone eventually does source them: like any other article, the standard is unsourceable, not currently or immediately sourced. (This does not apply to BLP stubs, which are routinely deleted by WP:BLPPROD if not sourced within 10 days--but such are not in question here.) Starting stubs from a reasonably reliable database is valid practice, if done carefully. The only such creations which have really caused problems are those where the material is either obsolete or fundamentally unreliable, or derived from unknown sources, or produce articles which are unsustainable. Since it is accepted that all buildings or historic areas on the NHRP are individually notable, it is reasonable to use the list of these as the basis for article stubs. Many of doncram' s stubs, like those from other people, have grown substantially. (I see no purpose to duplicate his list of them, above). All this is established consensus, though some have disagreed with it in the past.

doncram's sources are sufficiently reliable

The NHRP list has errors. So do essentially all other extensive sources, primary or secondary. (see the archives of WPN:RS) We routinely accept this, as we do many others, except for those which can be shown to be in error. An attempt to produce an error-free WP is beyond our capabilities, just as errors in all other extensive reference works have been beyond the capabilities of any group of humans. An editor should not avoid using whatever reasonable sources that are , just because they may have a small percentage or errors or need supplementing. All this is established policy.

people make articles in different ways

Some good editors do not like to submit anything less than a finished article of good quality. Some like to make sketches they will improve subsequently. Some, to make sketches they expect others to improve. At times, those who do not themselves like to work at making sketches or stubs, have criticized those who do otherwise (see Orlady's evidence, above, for examples). This can be constructive , if the person has been making too many articles which look like they will never be sourced or otherwise hopeless, but these are not in that category. As a major contributor to the NHRP project, Orlady should have known this.

Those bringing the Arb request have picked up a small number of minor errors to make a case against a creator of many articles

See Orlady's evidence, above, for examples. I'd estimate these at 10% initially incomplete, and only 1% have actual significant errors.

Current word length: 644 (limit: 500); diff count: 18. Evidence is too long: please reduce your submission so it fits within limits.

Doncram has been a prolific contributor

A complete listing of articles he has created can be found here:

http://toolserver.org/~tparis/pages/index.php?name=Doncram&namespace=0&redirects=noredirects&getall=1 --05:22, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Orlady has hounded Doncram

Orlady has followed Doncram's contributions for years

Orlady has shown up at articles Doncram has created soon after he creates them, sometimes within hours or even within minutes:

http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/timeline.cgi?page=Sidney_Yates_Building&user1=Orlady&user2=Doncram

http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/timeline.cgi?page=Anderson_County_Courthouse_%28Kansas%29&user1=Orlady&user2=Doncram

http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/timeline.cgi?page=Dayton_Masonic_Center&user1=Orlady&user2=Doncram

http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/timeline.cgi?page=Old_Town_%28Franklin%2C_Tennessee%29&user1=Orlady&user2=Doncram

http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/timeline.cgi?page=James_G._Hill&user1=Orlady&user2=Doncram

http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/timeline.cgi?page=Polly_Rosenbaum_Building&user1=Orlady&user2=Doncram

http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/timeline.cgi?page=Confederate_monuments&user1=Orlady&user2=Doncram

Sometimes the only content contributions to an article created by Doncram have been by him and Orlady:

http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Long_Meadow_%28Surgoinsville%2C_Tennessee%29&action=history

http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Bostick_Female_Academy&action=history

http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Carrie_Nation_House&action=history --20:18, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Orlady has move-warred with Doncram by userfying articles Doncram created

Hours after Doncram created Grand Forks County Fairgrounds WPA Structures, Orlady userfied the article. Doncram moved the article back to mainspace. Orlady userfied the article again and then move-protected the page. Within two days the article was improved enough for Orlady to accept it being moved back to mainspace.

Within half an hour of Doncram moving List of round barns] into article space, Orlady userfied the article despite it being tagged as "under construction" and having been recently edited. Doncram moved it back to articlespace, and Orlady once more userfied the article. Half a day later, after more editing, Doncram moved it back into articlespace.--20:18, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Orlady's list of "problem" articles is an implied attack on Doncram

The listing of articles in User:Orlady/List contains over a hundred entries. Nearly all of these articles were added by Orlady and were apparently selected solely because they were articles to which Doncram had contributed. A significant number of articles such as Williams and Stancliff Octagon Houses, The Seaside (Waterford, Connecticut), and Southern Thames Historic District, were actually created by other editors and only appear to be included because Doncram had expanded them. One such article, Congregation Knesseth Israel (Ellington, Connecticut), saw minor expansion that added nothing that appears problematic. In another article listed at that page, Emmanuel Church (Newport, Rhode Island), there was only a single edit from Doncram doing some minor expansion. It appears there was no basis for the selection of this small fraction of Doncram's contributions, other than them involving articles being expanded in some way by Doncram, no matter how minor the expansion. By including any expansion by Doncram as part of a list of articles to be "fixed" this page creates a negative impression of Doncram's contributions as a whole.--05:22, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Example of systematic nature to Orlady's hounding

Doncram alluded to an incident involving the Frederick G. Clausen article, and I feel this ties together a lot of the problems cited above with Orlady. Similar to above instances, Orlady showed up at the article within hours of its creation as can be seen by the revision history. Two days later Orlady leaves two comments on the talk page. A quote from the first comment:

Frederick G. Clausen was a notable architect. The cleanest and sanest way to document his biography and his work is with a stand-alone article about his.

The comment about the "sanest" approach to the article was clearly denigrating Doncram. Orlady also accuses Doncram of "plagiarism" and "copyright violations" for this edit three partial sentence quotes. Doncram reacts angrily to the accusation of plagiarism and Orlady responds:

No personal attacks, please. Describing a type of content as plagiarism is not personal. "Inflammatory and obnoxious" is making it personal. No comment on the F word. Please don't give me reason to add to this list (or, for that matter, this one).

In other words, Orlady blatantly followed Doncram to an article, made frivolous charges and insulting comments, and when Doncram reacted Orlady made a veiled threat of adding more negative material to pages focused on Doncram. This action of following Doncram to an article, insulting him, and then threatening to add more negative material to pages about Doncram when he reacts is textbook hounding.--21:51, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Doncram's blocks mostly involve interactions with Sarek, Nyttend, and Orlady

• 20:18, 11 October 2010 - WP:INVOLVED block by Sarek per JASSpencer's evidence.
• 21:11, 15 April 2011 - Block by Sarek for this comment about Orlady.
• 14:49, 17 May 2011 - Edit-warring with Sarek here.
• 00:34, 10 June 2011 - Edit-warring with Sarek here and here.
• 13:53, 2 August 2011 - Three months after ANI filing by Nyttend here.
• 03:34, 20 December 2011 - Insulting Sarek for deletion nomination here.
• 22:29, 28 December 2011 - Six months for edit-warring with Sarek here.
• 01:51, 5 January 2013 - Move and edit-warring with Nyttend and Sarek here and here.

Nyttend has made improper deletions of Doncram-created material

• Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2012 December 29#House at 1022 West Main Street - Nyttend speedy deleted multiple redirects by Doncram. Restored at DRV.
• Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2013 January 4#Old Union School .28Chesterville.2C Ohio.29 - Speedy deleted as "unambiguous copyvio" for an attributed ten-word quote according to this discussion. Dispute led to January 5th block noted above and, apparently, Doncram's RFAR filing two days later.

Current word length: 470; diff count: 4.

Context

• This Toolserver diff cited above shows the interactions between Doncram and Orlandy and gives the appearance that Orlady was first on the scene. While the Sidney Yates Building article history shows that Sarek was there and that he/she edited the article before Orlady.
• Likewise this diff, also cited above shows similar Toolserver results but the Anderson County Courthouse history page shows three other editors made multiple edits over a one year period before Orlady made her first edit.
• A Toolserver User Interaction Analysis for Doncram, Orlady and SarekOfVulcan 12/1/12 to 1/21/13 yields this result which shows Sarek has edited with Doncram just as much as Orlady and that their combined edits are much lower than Doncram's. It would appear that Sarek (and possibly others) have interacted with Doncram just as often as Orlady. Something to consider.

Involved parties

• Donacram blocked 10 times over the past 2 ½ years for edit warring (4), 3RR (1,) disruptive editing (2), and personal attacks (1). Two of the blocks by SarekOfVulcan and zero by Orlady/Nyttend. Most recent block (Dec 2012) was 6 months for “serial edit warring”. [77]
• Elkman was blocked for WP:AIV disruption (2), and self blocking to make a WP:POINT (8) [78] No blocks since 2009.
• SarekOfVulcan (sysop) blocked 5 times since November 2010 for edit warring (3), 3RR (2). [79]
• Nyttend (sysop) blocked once in June 2009 for edit warring. [80]
• Orlady (sysop) never blocked [81]
• Sitush: never blocked [82]

Battleground

• Doncram visits Thundersnow’s talk page in November 2012 He/She leaves a polite message on Thundersnow’s talk page saying he/she has reverted Thundersnow’s removal of two photos of the Bullock's Pasadena building. Thundersnow replies and cites WP:NOTIMAGE as the reason for removal. Donacram responds by saying “that is horrible”. A few weeks later Doncram leaves a message saying he has reverted 34 of Thundersnow’s photo removal edits. Although Thundersnow's deletions were severe Doncram’s mass reversion seems equally radical and adversarial.
• The discussion was then continued at the NHRP talk page. When Orlady joins the discussion and suggests a compromise, Doncram deletes Orlady’s comment and responds with an unprovoked, personal attack:
  • I utterly resent an editor who has long tangled with me butting in here to complicate matters, commenting directly after me…….The editor has done more than anyone to fan flames of contention among NRHP editors IMO over many years of contention. The editor has resumed a pattern of stalking my edits, recently opening an AFD which was/is totally unjustified, seems rather to be an assertion of dominance, of right to bedevil me. The post i removed could be considered supportive perhaps of my position, but I perceive the wp:POINTY point to be an assertion of that editor's "right" to follow my edits and complicate. I don't want to hear it. I have repeatedly asked this editor to stop, but the editor continues, including posting at my Talk page against my wishes…….

Current word length: 259; diff count: 6.

Doncram has exhibited a battlefield attitude on WikiProject NRHP

Both Doncram and Orlady are members of this sizeable WikiProject. Members are actively encouraged to help editing the numerous associated articles, so interactions are to be expected on articles (for example [83]). On the WikiProject talk page Thundersnow raised a point about the number of images Doncram was adding to short articles. Doncram's reaction was described in the original request. [84] Thundersnow asked for these issues to be reviewed by other members. After several other editors had commented, Orlady presented a review of some of the articles under discussion with her own suggestions. [85] Doncram's reaction was to blank her submission, replacing it with a personal attack. [86] Orlady filed a report at WP:ANI. [87] Her contribution was restored by Nyttend with a warning. [88] Acroterion gave a further warning. [89] Doncram later acknowledged, after this arbcom case had been requested, that his interactions with Thundersnow had been problematic, [90] although Thundersnow was not happy with his explanations. [91]

Many editors actively involved in WikiProject NRHP intersect with Doncram on a significant number of article pages

This data, initially submitted on the workshop talk page in longer form, is being added at the suggestion of AGK.

There are just under 180 users subscribed to this WikiProject; some of them are blocked sockpuppets of banned users, some are administrators and some are ex-arbitrators. Here is a list of accounts that have edited more than 500 articles in common with Doncram. (The figure in bold indicates the number of common articles.)

1. Acroterion 886 [92]
2. Appraiser 2628 [93]
3. Clariosophic 1355 [94]
4. Daniel Case 852 [95]
5. Dmadeo 1210 [96]
6. Dudemanfellabra 891 [97]
7. Ebyabe 4193 [98]
8. Einbierbitte 932 [99]
9. Elkman 1642 [100]
10. KudzuVine 1940 [101]
11. Niagara 644 [102]
12. Nyttend 3113 [103]
13. Orlady 1269 [104]
14. Pubdog 2633 [105]
15. Sanfranman59 1502 [106]
16. Smallbones 622 [107]
17. Swampyank 1038 [108]
18. 25or6to4 538 [109]

Current word length: 441; diff count: 6.

Orlady followed from the beginning

Orlady the onset of difficult interactions to August 28, 2008. Orlady’s participation at WP:NRHP surged at that same time. From 10 Nov 2007 through August 2008, she had made 16 edits (avg 1.6/mo). In September, 2008 she made 22. She apparently reluctantly at this time, “admitting the reality that I am a project participant”. In October, 2008 she made 23 edits. From September, 2008 to December, 2011, 279 edits there, avg. 7/month. During the entire first 6 months of 2012, she made only 1 edit while Doncram was blocked. Coincidence?

Places doncram has worked across WikiProjects

Doncram makes disambiguation pages before the articles are created. Sarek sees this as negative. But, the protocol for this was worked out in a long discussion at WP:Disambiguation, here, begun by doncram, titled “what is wp:NRHP doing wrong RE disambiguation?”.

At WP:Ships, he discussed use of multiple templates in articles where a ship was also an NRHP here in the section “New DANFS section template available”, cheerfully backing off when they didn’t like his suggestion.

At WP:Lighthouses, he discussed coordinating infoboxes here in the section “Coordination with Wikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places”.

At WP:BLP, he pitched in during the Spring of 2010, when a huge number of inadequately sourced articles were going to be deleted if not corrected.

Doncram collaborates

I have observed and/or been part of many collaborations between doncram and many other editors.

April, 2008; invited me to help on an article, mentions others potentially involved, here.

May, 2008; worked on getting the List of NRHPs in NY ready for FL review. There were several editors involved, including Daniel Case, dmadeo and Ruhrfisch. Names documented in the FL review cited by Orlady.

Spring of 2008; there was a push to get articles well begun for all NHLs. Doncram coordinated, and at the end gave barnstars for participation to about 30 editors. See his contributions 4 July 2008 between 16:03-16:41.

Spring of 2009; another push was made to tableize every state’s NRHPs. Doncram coordinated, and thanked 10 participants with barnstars.

In September, 2009, we worked on lists of UNESCO World Heritage sites, part of WP:Historic Sites, begun by doncram in March, 2009.

Sarek's rude

This infuriated me personally. While doncram was blocked for a week, Sarek took a "straw poll" on a topic he knew doncram would have a differing viewpoint about. I asserted that all participants should be allowed to participate. Sarek removed my comments here, with the edit summary that began "rm soapboxing". I began a new section, and shared my outrage that Sarek was manipulating a discussion that way here. I left the entire conversation conversation feeling more disenchanted than ever. It wasn't doncram that drove ME out of wikipedia.

before using the last evidence template, please make a copy for the next person

{Write your assertion here}

Place argument and diffs which support the second assertion; for example, your second assertion might be "So-and-so makes personal attacks", which should be the title of this section. Here you would show specific edits where So-and-so made personal attacks.