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 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: {insert UTC timestamp with ~~~~~}), the page will be deleted. The current date and time is: 13:17, 11 July 2024 (UTC).
This is a summary written by users who dispute this user's conduct. Users signing other sections ("Response" or "Outside views") should not edit the "Statement of the dispute" section.
This Request for Comment specifically deals with two separate issues. Issue #1: The anal sex and cocaine obsessed User:Wiki_brah has repeatedly ignored warnings from various administrators and editors to cease making nonsense articles. While promising he will improve his contributions, his new articles remain pointless, nonsense, and smack of eccentric "original research." The great majority of his articles have been speedily deleted or deleted after a "Vote for Deletion."
Issue #2: User:Wiki_brah has likewise ignored warnings from various administrators and editors to cease making and proposing nonsense templates. Many of his templates have been speedily deleted, including one that he created describing porno "actress's" proficiency at anal sex.
This Request for Comment shall not delve into the other aspects of User:Wiki_brah's disruptive behavior such as his annoying and whiny comments posted on many users' talk pages. TheDeletator ( talk · contribs)
(Provide diffs. Links to entire articles aren't helpful unless the editor created the entire article. Edit histories also aren't helpful as they change as new edits are performed.)
Anal Sex 3 |
This pornographic actress demonstrates |
(culled from his sandbox)
{list the policies that apply to the disputed conduct}
(provide diffs and links) User_talk:Wiki_brah provides much evidence of other users warning him on his behavior and pleading with him to conform and follow the basic guidelines, but some of them are listed here:
(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. Users signing other sections ("Statement of the dispute" and "Outside Views") should not edit the "Response" section.
I donnt understand what you are yellng at me about I mean tlook at tmy usser page I mean I am just trying to help out with things I can write about dont you think its my business how I live my live and even if I do some stuff that we dont approve of in the U.S.A,. its still ok I mean its so hard sometimes so we can either do something the easy way or the hard way. ( I asaww that in a movie once) thank you Obrigado, Wiki brah 02:13, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
Hi its me again, User:Lucky_6.9 I thank you for all your help and your kind words. Its getting late here but not to worry I just did three lines of prime Peruvian Flake and my mother and father are asleep for the night. I might call up some hookers to come over and party a bit. I feel much more lucid right now, my typing is improved and I feel calm, alert, ready to go!! If I could feel like this all the time I think I could write much more better on the Wikipedia article-space, as Lucky calls it. And like I told lucky, I'm writing on TV and movies in Argentina, Brasil, and the U.S.A. all that we get on satellite here at my parents house thank you! Well, I'll check back in later if the hookers dont come over thanks! Wiki brah 02:13, 3 September 2005 (UTC) Wiki_brah ( talk · contribs)
Hi its me again hello good evning. I was in Rio de Janeiro with my father for a week and it was fun we had a nice place to satay and I lerned a blot I am thinking the writing is better for me when I can do a littel bit of something before I sit down it makes it better Wiki brah 01:25, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~~~~):
This is a very strange editor who clearly has some distinctive preoccupations including a preoccupation with defining very strange templates. The certifiers and endorsers of this Request for Comments / Request for Corrective Action have, as is usually the case in Wikipedia, been very patient with an editor who seems to mean well but is simply so bizarre that he has no concept of collaboration. He appears to be treating the Wikipedia as his private litterbox and leaving other editors to clean up his mess. I wish that I could see any evidence of real potential, but I don't. I wish that there were some alternative to simply keeping him out of here, but I don't see what it is.
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. Users editing other sections ("Statement of the dispute" and "Response") should not edit the "Outside Views" section, except to endorse an outside view.
This is just a troll, and not a terribly good one. He should probably be blocked permanently.
Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~~~~):
This editor just keeps going and going, but he seems to be in good faith. For this reason, I do not believe in an indefinite block, unless he continues his behavior. I have given him a block expiring October 1. If he keeps up his shenanigans, he will get a two month block. If he keeps it up after that, THEN I believe we should indefinitely block him.
Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~~~~):
Autism and wikipedia
There are two cases that concern me a lot because of the characteristics exhibited by the main editors involved.
Maoririder ( talk · contribs), whose case has been accepted by the Arbitration committee and is still in the evidence phase, is not an obvious vandal or troll. He has made large numbers of vanishingly small stubs, some of which have grown into very impressive articles, and also asked intriguing, childlike, questions in an appropriate forum.
Wiki brah ( talk · contribs), who has been subjected to many blocks from his earliest appearance in mid-August, has written articles that have been identified as "nonsense" by RC patrollers, but in a discussion with fellow administrators they tended to the opinion that the articles were acceptable newbie stubs and did not merit the vandalism warnings that they provoked:
For some time I have had a strong suspicion that Maoririder may be autistic. Wiki brah's contributions also fit the pattern.
The above reminds me of an early response to Maoririder:
While the stubs in question were indeed tiny, they were hardly vandalism. Big-eyed bug, for instance, read as follows:
Today Wikipedia has coverage for both of those insects, mainly thanks to
Maoririder's stubs and the good faith expansions performed by other
editors.
Another of Maoririder's stubs was Portland High School. Later moved to " Portland High School, Portland, Maine" Maoririder's original stub read:
The article was listed on AfD four days after its creation. The article was expanded--the school, founded in 1821, turned out to be one of the first public high schools founded in the United States after the Revolution, and the article was expanded in a few minutes and, via a premature speedy delete or two, the result of the debate was keep, with only one vote to delete.
Now this isn't a deletionism-versus-inclusionism. Let us accept, for now, that it might be quite reasonable to delete very short stubs rather than expand them. No, this is about how the authors of articles that appear weird, but not obviously malicious, should be treated.
Both Maoririder and Wiki brah have been labelled, variously, trolls and vandals, although I do not see strong evidence to support either label.
Both of them have expressed a strong wish to produce work for Wikipedia. Both of them produce articles that appear weird to non-autists. In my opinion, neither represents a threat to Wikipedia commensurate to the treatment they have received.
In my opinion, the world's first encyclopedia that anyone can edit should not continue knowingly to alienate, abuse and reject autists. We need a policy that enables autists to be identified early and welcomed in an appropriate manner so that, whenever possible, they can produce valuable work for Wikipedia. Don't bite the newbies applies in spades for people with special needs.
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. 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.
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 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: {insert UTC timestamp with ~~~~~}), the page will be deleted. The current date and time is: 13:17, 11 July 2024 (UTC).
This is a summary written by users who dispute this user's conduct. Users signing other sections ("Response" or "Outside views") should not edit the "Statement of the dispute" section.
This Request for Comment specifically deals with two separate issues. Issue #1: The anal sex and cocaine obsessed User:Wiki_brah has repeatedly ignored warnings from various administrators and editors to cease making nonsense articles. While promising he will improve his contributions, his new articles remain pointless, nonsense, and smack of eccentric "original research." The great majority of his articles have been speedily deleted or deleted after a "Vote for Deletion."
Issue #2: User:Wiki_brah has likewise ignored warnings from various administrators and editors to cease making and proposing nonsense templates. Many of his templates have been speedily deleted, including one that he created describing porno "actress's" proficiency at anal sex.
This Request for Comment shall not delve into the other aspects of User:Wiki_brah's disruptive behavior such as his annoying and whiny comments posted on many users' talk pages. TheDeletator ( talk · contribs)
(Provide diffs. Links to entire articles aren't helpful unless the editor created the entire article. Edit histories also aren't helpful as they change as new edits are performed.)
Anal Sex 3 |
This pornographic actress demonstrates |
(culled from his sandbox)
{list the policies that apply to the disputed conduct}
(provide diffs and links) User_talk:Wiki_brah provides much evidence of other users warning him on his behavior and pleading with him to conform and follow the basic guidelines, but some of them are listed here:
(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. Users signing other sections ("Statement of the dispute" and "Outside Views") should not edit the "Response" section.
I donnt understand what you are yellng at me about I mean tlook at tmy usser page I mean I am just trying to help out with things I can write about dont you think its my business how I live my live and even if I do some stuff that we dont approve of in the U.S.A,. its still ok I mean its so hard sometimes so we can either do something the easy way or the hard way. ( I asaww that in a movie once) thank you Obrigado, Wiki brah 02:13, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
Hi its me again, User:Lucky_6.9 I thank you for all your help and your kind words. Its getting late here but not to worry I just did three lines of prime Peruvian Flake and my mother and father are asleep for the night. I might call up some hookers to come over and party a bit. I feel much more lucid right now, my typing is improved and I feel calm, alert, ready to go!! If I could feel like this all the time I think I could write much more better on the Wikipedia article-space, as Lucky calls it. And like I told lucky, I'm writing on TV and movies in Argentina, Brasil, and the U.S.A. all that we get on satellite here at my parents house thank you! Well, I'll check back in later if the hookers dont come over thanks! Wiki brah 02:13, 3 September 2005 (UTC) Wiki_brah ( talk · contribs)
Hi its me again hello good evning. I was in Rio de Janeiro with my father for a week and it was fun we had a nice place to satay and I lerned a blot I am thinking the writing is better for me when I can do a littel bit of something before I sit down it makes it better Wiki brah 01:25, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~~~~):
This is a very strange editor who clearly has some distinctive preoccupations including a preoccupation with defining very strange templates. The certifiers and endorsers of this Request for Comments / Request for Corrective Action have, as is usually the case in Wikipedia, been very patient with an editor who seems to mean well but is simply so bizarre that he has no concept of collaboration. He appears to be treating the Wikipedia as his private litterbox and leaving other editors to clean up his mess. I wish that I could see any evidence of real potential, but I don't. I wish that there were some alternative to simply keeping him out of here, but I don't see what it is.
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. Users editing other sections ("Statement of the dispute" and "Response") should not edit the "Outside Views" section, except to endorse an outside view.
This is just a troll, and not a terribly good one. He should probably be blocked permanently.
Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~~~~):
This editor just keeps going and going, but he seems to be in good faith. For this reason, I do not believe in an indefinite block, unless he continues his behavior. I have given him a block expiring October 1. If he keeps up his shenanigans, he will get a two month block. If he keeps it up after that, THEN I believe we should indefinitely block him.
Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~~~~):
Autism and wikipedia
There are two cases that concern me a lot because of the characteristics exhibited by the main editors involved.
Maoririder ( talk · contribs), whose case has been accepted by the Arbitration committee and is still in the evidence phase, is not an obvious vandal or troll. He has made large numbers of vanishingly small stubs, some of which have grown into very impressive articles, and also asked intriguing, childlike, questions in an appropriate forum.
Wiki brah ( talk · contribs), who has been subjected to many blocks from his earliest appearance in mid-August, has written articles that have been identified as "nonsense" by RC patrollers, but in a discussion with fellow administrators they tended to the opinion that the articles were acceptable newbie stubs and did not merit the vandalism warnings that they provoked:
For some time I have had a strong suspicion that Maoririder may be autistic. Wiki brah's contributions also fit the pattern.
The above reminds me of an early response to Maoririder:
While the stubs in question were indeed tiny, they were hardly vandalism. Big-eyed bug, for instance, read as follows:
Today Wikipedia has coverage for both of those insects, mainly thanks to
Maoririder's stubs and the good faith expansions performed by other
editors.
Another of Maoririder's stubs was Portland High School. Later moved to " Portland High School, Portland, Maine" Maoririder's original stub read:
The article was listed on AfD four days after its creation. The article was expanded--the school, founded in 1821, turned out to be one of the first public high schools founded in the United States after the Revolution, and the article was expanded in a few minutes and, via a premature speedy delete or two, the result of the debate was keep, with only one vote to delete.
Now this isn't a deletionism-versus-inclusionism. Let us accept, for now, that it might be quite reasonable to delete very short stubs rather than expand them. No, this is about how the authors of articles that appear weird, but not obviously malicious, should be treated.
Both Maoririder and Wiki brah have been labelled, variously, trolls and vandals, although I do not see strong evidence to support either label.
Both of them have expressed a strong wish to produce work for Wikipedia. Both of them produce articles that appear weird to non-autists. In my opinion, neither represents a threat to Wikipedia commensurate to the treatment they have received.
In my opinion, the world's first encyclopedia that anyone can edit should not continue knowingly to alienate, abuse and reject autists. We need a policy that enables autists to be identified early and welcomed in an appropriate manner so that, whenever possible, they can produce valuable work for Wikipedia. Don't bite the newbies applies in spades for people with special needs.
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. 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.