To remain listed at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User conduct, 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 with a single user, not different disputes or multiple users. 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: 21:05, 24 August 2012 (UTC)), the page will be deleted. The current date and time is: 12:34, 21 July 2024 (UTC).
Users should not edit other people's summaries or views, except to endorse them. All signed comments other than your own view or an endorsement should be directed to this page's discussion page.
This is a summary written by users who are concerned by this user's conduct. Users signing other sections ("Response" or "Outside views") should not edit the "Statement of the dispute" section.
Kurmaa, who has been around Wikipedia for some time but has only recently begun to participate in depth, is showing some difficulty in conforming to talk page guidelines outlined at WP:TALK. In a number of cases, it's disruptive. This behavior is occurring amid disagreement at articles related to Kamrup, including Kamrupi dialect, Kamarupi Prakrit, Ahom kingdom, and Kamrupi; it seems that Kurmaa has a fringe viewpoint on the matter but is not actually contributing to resolving disputes in any clear way.
For the disruptive behavior to stop. It would be ideal if Kurmaa could learn how to collaborate with other users, show a responsiveness to evidence that contradicts his viewpoint, and utilize the talk page as a way to improve article content. A combination of imperfect English skills, a fringe viewpoint, and stubbornness means this will take some patience from a mentor. Patience that I don't have. An alternate choice might be some sort of topic ban, though Kurmaa so far has been pretty restricted in editing articles related to Kamrup so a topic ban might be equivalent to a general Wikipedia ban.
Kurmaa posts the same thread in multiple forums
Kurmaa misrepresents others' posts
Kurmaa seems to provide threats to others
Kurmaa is disruptive in Wikipedia space:
Kurmaa has employed confirmed WP:SOCKs: User:Pranjitb, User:Mussal, User:130.65.109.101
All of this comes with a fringe point of view not backed up by facts or sources. This talk page comment seems to sum up his views. Edits he disagrees with or that he doesn't think fairly portray Kamrupi people are "ethnocentric." There's also this absurd claim that a source is unreliable because its author is a cheat (a thoroughly unsubstantiated accusation).
Provided above
{Users who tried and failed to resolve the dispute}
This section is reserved for the use of the user whose conduct is disputed. Users writing other sections ("Statement of the dispute" and "Outside Views") should not edit the "Response" section, and the person writing this section should not write a view below. Anyone is welcome to endorse this or any other view, but no one except the editor(s) named in the dispute may change the summary here.
{Add your summary here. You must use the endorsement section below to sign it.}
Users who endorse this summary:
This section is for statements or opinions written by users not directly involved with this dispute, but who would like to add a view of the dispute. Users should not edit other people's summaries or views, except to endorse them. All signed comments other than your own view or an endorsement should be directed to this page's discussion page. Users editing other sections ("Statement of the dispute" or "Response") should not normally edit this section, except to endorse another person's view.
My view is that the user, at times, is clearly acting in good faith, but as mentioned may have some English issues and is frustrated. I would support a week-long topic ban followed by a mentorship program where he/she can learn about edit warring, the three revert rule, etc. I know of a few specific users who may be able to mentor Kurmaa, but it is clear his edits are disruptive and something needs to be done to stop this disruption. Go Phightins! ( talk) 23:38, 25 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Users who endorse this summary:
{Add your summary here. You must use the endorsement section below to sign it. Anyone is welcome to endorse this or any other view, but do not change other people's views.}
Users who endorse this summary:
All signed comments and talk not related to an endorsement should be directed to this page's discussion page. Discussion should not be added below. Discussion should be posted on the talk page. Threaded replies to another user's vote, endorsement, evidence, response, or comment should be posted to the talk page.
Hey how did you make this request? where Can I find a guide about creating RFC and citing diffs in a CURequest, and other such stuff?? I go to pages on wiki but they say nothing of the code you need to make this detailed, they dont explain how to list a page on the "candidate" etc.
User is indef blocked for sockpuppetry and never responded to the above, so it is being closed as stale. In the even the should be unblocked, this RFC could be re-opened to permit him to address the community's concerns. MBisanz talk 19:01, 4 October 2012 (UTC) reply
To remain listed at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User conduct, 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 with a single user, not different disputes or multiple users. 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: 21:05, 24 August 2012 (UTC)), the page will be deleted. The current date and time is: 12:34, 21 July 2024 (UTC).
Users should not edit other people's summaries or views, except to endorse them. All signed comments other than your own view or an endorsement should be directed to this page's discussion page.
This is a summary written by users who are concerned by this user's conduct. Users signing other sections ("Response" or "Outside views") should not edit the "Statement of the dispute" section.
Kurmaa, who has been around Wikipedia for some time but has only recently begun to participate in depth, is showing some difficulty in conforming to talk page guidelines outlined at WP:TALK. In a number of cases, it's disruptive. This behavior is occurring amid disagreement at articles related to Kamrup, including Kamrupi dialect, Kamarupi Prakrit, Ahom kingdom, and Kamrupi; it seems that Kurmaa has a fringe viewpoint on the matter but is not actually contributing to resolving disputes in any clear way.
For the disruptive behavior to stop. It would be ideal if Kurmaa could learn how to collaborate with other users, show a responsiveness to evidence that contradicts his viewpoint, and utilize the talk page as a way to improve article content. A combination of imperfect English skills, a fringe viewpoint, and stubbornness means this will take some patience from a mentor. Patience that I don't have. An alternate choice might be some sort of topic ban, though Kurmaa so far has been pretty restricted in editing articles related to Kamrup so a topic ban might be equivalent to a general Wikipedia ban.
Kurmaa posts the same thread in multiple forums
Kurmaa misrepresents others' posts
Kurmaa seems to provide threats to others
Kurmaa is disruptive in Wikipedia space:
Kurmaa has employed confirmed WP:SOCKs: User:Pranjitb, User:Mussal, User:130.65.109.101
All of this comes with a fringe point of view not backed up by facts or sources. This talk page comment seems to sum up his views. Edits he disagrees with or that he doesn't think fairly portray Kamrupi people are "ethnocentric." There's also this absurd claim that a source is unreliable because its author is a cheat (a thoroughly unsubstantiated accusation).
Provided above
{Users who tried and failed to resolve the dispute}
This section is reserved for the use of the user whose conduct is disputed. Users writing other sections ("Statement of the dispute" and "Outside Views") should not edit the "Response" section, and the person writing this section should not write a view below. Anyone is welcome to endorse this or any other view, but no one except the editor(s) named in the dispute may change the summary here.
{Add your summary here. You must use the endorsement section below to sign it.}
Users who endorse this summary:
This section is for statements or opinions written by users not directly involved with this dispute, but who would like to add a view of the dispute. Users should not edit other people's summaries or views, except to endorse them. All signed comments other than your own view or an endorsement should be directed to this page's discussion page. Users editing other sections ("Statement of the dispute" or "Response") should not normally edit this section, except to endorse another person's view.
My view is that the user, at times, is clearly acting in good faith, but as mentioned may have some English issues and is frustrated. I would support a week-long topic ban followed by a mentorship program where he/she can learn about edit warring, the three revert rule, etc. I know of a few specific users who may be able to mentor Kurmaa, but it is clear his edits are disruptive and something needs to be done to stop this disruption. Go Phightins! ( talk) 23:38, 25 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Users who endorse this summary:
{Add your summary here. You must use the endorsement section below to sign it. Anyone is welcome to endorse this or any other view, but do not change other people's views.}
Users who endorse this summary:
All signed comments and talk not related to an endorsement should be directed to this page's discussion page. Discussion should not be added below. Discussion should be posted on the talk page. Threaded replies to another user's vote, endorsement, evidence, response, or comment should be posted to the talk page.
Hey how did you make this request? where Can I find a guide about creating RFC and citing diffs in a CURequest, and other such stuff?? I go to pages on wiki but they say nothing of the code you need to make this detailed, they dont explain how to list a page on the "candidate" etc.
User is indef blocked for sockpuppetry and never responded to the above, so it is being closed as stale. In the even the should be unblocked, this RFC could be re-opened to permit him to address the community's concerns. MBisanz talk 19:01, 4 October 2012 (UTC) reply