Misplaced Pages

:Requests for comment/User conduct: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 04:45, 7 February 2007 editMdwyer (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users3,886 edits →General user conduct← Previous edit Latest revision as of 04:08, 25 July 2022 edit undoDwaipayanc (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers30,440 editsm Reverted edits by 5.245.241.17 (talk) to last version by Ed6767Tag: Rollback 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{short description|historical document}}
{{shortcut|]<br>]}}
{{selfref|WP:RFC/U redirects here. You may be looking for ] (formerly WP:RFCU) or for ] (])}}
This process is for discussing specific users who have violated ]. In order to request comments on a user's actions, follow the instructions to create a subpage in the section below. Disputes over the writing of articles, including disputes over how best to follow the ] policy, belong in ].
{{historical|type=woundup|comment=<br>'''The RFC/U process has been discontinued as a result of ].'''<br>'''Other ] processes should be used for conduct issues.|brief=yes}}
{{info|Prior to ] at the ] that was closed in December 2014, ] on user conduct (RfC/Us) were used to discuss the problematic behaviour of specific Misplaced Pages editors, as part of the ]. RfC/Us were an informal, non-binding process. According to the discussion's closing statement, many editors found the RfC/U process ineffectual. As a result, it was closed down on 7 December 2014.


Old RfC/Us can be found in ].
==Uncertified user RfCs==
}}
Requests for comment which do not meet the minimum requirements 48 hours after creation are considered "uncertified" and will be de-listed. See ] for the minimum requirements. The subject RFC page will also be deleted, unless the subject has explicitly requested it to be retained.

==Closing and archiving==
Disputes may be removed from this page and archived under any of the following circumstances:
# If no additional complaints are registered for an extended period of time, and the dispute appears to have stopped.
# The parties to the dispute agree.
# The dispute proceeds to another method of dispute resolution, such as mediation or arbitration.
Remove the link from the list here and add it to the archives at ''']'''. If the dispute is handled in mediation or arbitration, please make a note of where the dispute resolution process continued.

==General user conduct==
Discussions about user conduct should be listed in this section unless the complaint is specifically about the use of admin privileges or the choice of username. To list a user conduct dispute, please create a subpage using ] as a template, and then list it as follows:

;]
:{''one or two'' short sentences giving the dry facts} <nowiki>~~~~~</nowiki> (note: that is five tildes, not four, RFCs are signed with the date only, not your username)

<inputbox>
type=create
preload=Template:RfCsubst
default=Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/USERNAME
buttonlabel=User conduct
bgcolor=#eeeeff
width=50
</inputbox>

===Candidate pages===
These RfCs still need to meet the two-person threshold. List newer entries on top.

;]
:Spams pages, then ] who try to point him towards ], ], ] and ]. 04:45, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

;]
:] on my , 3RR (recently blocked , outwardly stating he doesn't care about 3RR rule (see his talk page). He is doing this bully approach on many different pages. 20:46 4 February 2007 (UTC)

===Approved pages===
These RfCs have met the two-person threshold. List newer entries on top.

;]
:Incivility, personal attacks, accusations of sockpuppetry on both sides, harassment. - 18:07 4 February 2007 (UTC)

;''']'''
:3RR, Sock, personal attacks, etc. concerning the political issues of naming convention with Taiwan/ROC. 02:10, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

;''']'''
:], ], other issues. 23:20, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

;]
:Filing an RFC on myself à la Kelly Martin. 16:10, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

;]
:], ], ], ] 15:13, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

;]
:], ], ] 11:46, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

;]
:], ], ], and ]

;]
:], ], ] violations 21:12, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

;]
:Use of the term 'deletionist' to describe other editors. 01:51, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

;]
:], ], ], ] violations 00:44, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

;]
:], ], and ] violations 19:18, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

;]
:Violations of ],] & ] at ] leading to incivility and personal attacks.18:42, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

;]
:] and ] violations - 07:18, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

;]
:], ] 13:53, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

;]
:], ] 04:44, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

;]
:For quite some time now, Mitsos has brought a severe bias to articles dealing with Nazism or Greece. He makes edits that blatently promote his admitted political bias with little or no regard for Misplaced Pages's policices. 15:31, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

;]
:], ], ], ], ], ], ], ]

;]
:This is an omnibus request for comments regarding this editor's long history of administrative and editorial misconduct. 04:32, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

;]
:] and ] violations -- 02:57, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

;]
:All of user's edits seem racist and/or anti-semetic - at the very least extremely controversial. User is also very incivil to other users. 23:48, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

;]
:Abu Badali has seem fixated on his quest to delete all images and refuse to accept or listen to any disputes. I have also noticed him deleting dispute tags from images where people have not left a message on the talk page... 21:28, November 28, 2006 (UTC)

== Use of administrator privileges ==
This section is only for discussions specifically related to the use of sysop rights by ]. This includes the actions of protecting or unprotecting pages, deleting or undeleting pages, and blocking or unblocking users. If the dispute is over an admin's actions as an editor, it should be listed under the '''General user conduct''' section above. To list a dispute, create a subpage using the following sample as a template:

;]
:Allegations: {''one or two'' short sentences giving the dry facts} <nowiki>~~~~~</nowiki>

As with disputes over general user conduct, '''at least two people''' must certify that they believe there is a legitimate basis for the complaint. If the listing is not certified within 48 hours of listing, it will be deleted.

===Candidate pages===
These RfCs still need to meet the two-person threshold. List newer entries on top.

;]
:Allegations: Failure to understand and/or refusal to follow ] plus improper allegations of votestacking vis-à-vis Deletion Review of article ]. -04:13, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

===Approved pages===
These RfCs have met the two-person threshold. List newer entries on top.

;]
:Allegations: ] has inappropriately used his administrative privileges in editorial conflicts, blocking users indiscriminately and inappropriately (and later being compelled to unblock said editors). 15:02, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

;]
:Allegations: Trödel took personal offense at my request that he cite his sources for a statement he made, and subsequently forbid me from discussing anything with him, illegimately blocked me for a threat that I never made, and has been keeping a vulture-eye on my edit history even though he agreed not to in an ANI I previously filed seeking protection from him. 05:35, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

;]
:User has apparently engaged in wheel-warring of some sort. I've no involvement or real knowledge of the issue (user who made the request is blocked at the moment and cannot edit... asked for a proxy filing on IRC) 06:35, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

]

Latest revision as of 04:08, 25 July 2022

historical document WP:RFC/U redirects here. You may be looking for Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations (formerly WP:RFCU) or for Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/User names (WP:RFC/NAME)
This page has been closed down by community consensus, and is retained only for historical reference.
If you wish to restart discussion on the status of this page, seek community input at a forum such as the village pump.
The RFC/U process has been discontinued as a result of this discussion.
Other dispute resolution processes should be used for conduct issues.
Prior to a discussion at the Village Pump that was closed in December 2014, requests for comment on user conduct (RfC/Us) were used to discuss the problematic behaviour of specific Misplaced Pages editors, as part of the dispute resolution process. RfC/Us were an informal, non-binding process. According to the discussion's closing statement, many editors found the RfC/U process ineffectual. As a result, it was closed down on 7 December 2014. Old RfC/Us can be found in Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/User conduct/Archive.
Category: