In order to remain listed at Wikipedia:Requests for comment, at least two people need to show that they tried to resolve a dispute with this user and have failed. This must involve the same dispute, not different disputes. The persons complaining must provide evidence of their efforts, and each of them must certify it by signing this page with ~~~~. If this does not happen within 48 hours of the creation of this dispute page (which was: 19:51, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)), the page will be deleted. The current date and time is: 03:38, 21 July 2024 (UTC).
This is a summary written by users who dispute this user's conduct. Users signing other sections should not edit here.
{Add summary here, but you must use the section below to certify or endorse it. Users who edit or endorse this summary should not edit the other summaries.}
Since arriving on Wikipedia, Hogeye (a self-described anarcho-capitalist (link taken from User:Hogeye)) has been trying to push his POV on the Anarchism article, resulting in a revert war which ended up with both Anarchism and Anarchism (disambiguation) being protected.
Unable to edit the article to how he wanted it to be, he created two versions of the article, which were both deleted. To try to save his version from being deleted, he created a backup copy of the article, which was speedy deleted. After all were deleted, he recreated the two versions with different titles, which were both speedy deleted ( Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Anarchism (philosophy) and Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Anarchism (movement)). Both were recreated again with the same titles and speedy deleted again.
He has also used personal attacks on his opponents. Many users have attempted compromise, but Hogeye insists upon his controversial position that the entire article should be written with his POV in mind - his intransigence has left the Anarchism article locked for some time.
(provide diffs and links)
Hogeye has also created numerous sock puppets and has edited anonymously to avoid the three-revert rule and his block by User:Hadal.
{list the policies that apply to the disputed conduct}
(provide diffs and links)
(sign with ~~~~)
(sign with ~~~~)
This is a summary written by the user whose conduct is disputed, or by other users who think that the dispute is unjustified and that the above summary is biased or incomplete.
This is simply some partisan anarcho-socialists trying to get rid of their competition. They are too biased and unreasonable to change their blatently POV anarchism article, so they've quit trying to discuss it and are now trying to play the system. Anyone who reads Anarchism Talk or the discussion with ToTheBarricades will see that I've willingly discussed the issues at length, and tried to reason with those in the prevailing clique. (Yes, occasionally I use colorful language. Get a grip, chumps!) Hogeye 23:27, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~~~~):
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.
{Add summary here, but you must use the endorsement section below to sign. Users who edit or endorse this summary should not edit the other summaries.}
This looks a poorly constructed case and selective and hypocritical persecution.
For instance, personal attack example 1 above, is hardly "personal", since noone is personally named or referred to, I have seen worse abuse heaped upon Nazis and fascists. Perhaps, using fowl language is a bit uncivil.
The selectiveness and hypocrisy is shown by chameleon endorsing the above. Here are the uncivilility and personal attacks he has engaged in just over within a short period of time. [10] [11]
Note, the uncivil language by Fatal here: [12]
And here is max rspct being uncivil [13]
Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~~~~):
All signed comments and talk not related to a vote or endorsement, should be directed to this page's discussion page.
In order to remain listed at Wikipedia:Requests for comment, at least two people need to show that they tried to resolve a dispute with this user and have failed. This must involve the same dispute, not different disputes. The persons complaining must provide evidence of their efforts, and each of them must certify it by signing this page with ~~~~. If this does not happen within 48 hours of the creation of this dispute page (which was: 19:51, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)), the page will be deleted. The current date and time is: 03:38, 21 July 2024 (UTC).
This is a summary written by users who dispute this user's conduct. Users signing other sections should not edit here.
{Add summary here, but you must use the section below to certify or endorse it. Users who edit or endorse this summary should not edit the other summaries.}
Since arriving on Wikipedia, Hogeye (a self-described anarcho-capitalist (link taken from User:Hogeye)) has been trying to push his POV on the Anarchism article, resulting in a revert war which ended up with both Anarchism and Anarchism (disambiguation) being protected.
Unable to edit the article to how he wanted it to be, he created two versions of the article, which were both deleted. To try to save his version from being deleted, he created a backup copy of the article, which was speedy deleted. After all were deleted, he recreated the two versions with different titles, which were both speedy deleted ( Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Anarchism (philosophy) and Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Anarchism (movement)). Both were recreated again with the same titles and speedy deleted again.
He has also used personal attacks on his opponents. Many users have attempted compromise, but Hogeye insists upon his controversial position that the entire article should be written with his POV in mind - his intransigence has left the Anarchism article locked for some time.
(provide diffs and links)
Hogeye has also created numerous sock puppets and has edited anonymously to avoid the three-revert rule and his block by User:Hadal.
{list the policies that apply to the disputed conduct}
(provide diffs and links)
(sign with ~~~~)
(sign with ~~~~)
This is a summary written by the user whose conduct is disputed, or by other users who think that the dispute is unjustified and that the above summary is biased or incomplete.
This is simply some partisan anarcho-socialists trying to get rid of their competition. They are too biased and unreasonable to change their blatently POV anarchism article, so they've quit trying to discuss it and are now trying to play the system. Anyone who reads Anarchism Talk or the discussion with ToTheBarricades will see that I've willingly discussed the issues at length, and tried to reason with those in the prevailing clique. (Yes, occasionally I use colorful language. Get a grip, chumps!) Hogeye 23:27, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~~~~):
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.
{Add summary here, but you must use the endorsement section below to sign. Users who edit or endorse this summary should not edit the other summaries.}
This looks a poorly constructed case and selective and hypocritical persecution.
For instance, personal attack example 1 above, is hardly "personal", since noone is personally named or referred to, I have seen worse abuse heaped upon Nazis and fascists. Perhaps, using fowl language is a bit uncivil.
The selectiveness and hypocrisy is shown by chameleon endorsing the above. Here are the uncivilility and personal attacks he has engaged in just over within a short period of time. [10] [11]
Note, the uncivil language by Fatal here: [12]
And here is max rspct being uncivil [13]
Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~~~~):
All signed comments and talk not related to a vote or endorsement, should be directed to this page's discussion page.