Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 06:46, 8 May 2007

In order to remain listed at Misplaced Pages: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: 10:34, 7 May 2007 (UTC)), the page will be deleted. The current date and time is: 11:42, 27 December 2024 (UTC).

• Eep² (talk · contribs · logs)

Users should only edit one summary or view, other than to endorse.

Statement of the dispute

• Eep² (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Eep² displays a number of behaviours which are problematic for the community.

• characterises admins as "wiktators" , pretends this is not incivil .
• asserts that those who remove content he likes are "wiki nazis/trolls/vultures"
• deliberate end-runs around deletion policy , User:Eep²/todo
• incivility
• a degree of passion which goes beyond advocacy and into disruption, as seen at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Peter Beter, Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Eep (7th nomination), others.

In short: it appears to be Eep²'s view that where consensus conflicts with his own agenda, consensus is wrong.

Desired outcome

• an end to the "wiktators" crap and similar aggressive posturing, including the "despises dictators" anti-admin userbox
• acceptance of consensus ins respect of deletions etc.
• a substantial reduction in "dick quotient" in debates.

Description

{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, other than to endorse them.}

Evidence of disputed behavior

• characterises admins as "wiktators" , pretends this is not incivil .
• asserts that those who remove content he likes are "wiki nazis/trolls/vultures"
• deliberate end-runs around deletion policy , User:Eep²/todo
• incivility

1. Guy (Help!) 10:52, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Don't forget YOUR incivility on Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/Peter_Beter: "Delete Aude is right, and most of the opposition is arm-waving. Note also possible vote-stacking through Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Paranormal, which should plainly be renamed WikiProject Anti-establishment." If anything, we're anti-oppression, from people like you. -Eep² 06:17, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Applicable policies and guidelines

civility, deletion policy, consensus, user space usage.

1. Guy (Help!) 11:16, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Evidence of trying and failing to resolve the dispute

(provide diffs and links)

1. User:BillC requests an end to the wiktator nonsense; Eep pretends innocence, uses distraction fallacies
2. User:Coredesat notes issues with behaviour on MfD
3. User:Ruhrfisch originally left a message on Eep's talk page concerning an edit to York, Pennsylvania, found the User Page problem and asked that it be fixed too, or else s/he would ask for its removal . Two days later, when the edit to York was fixed and the Eep User Page was not, s/he opened an MfD and notified Eep .

Users certifying the basis for this dispute

{Users who tried and failed to resolve the dispute}

1. Coredesat 18:18, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
2. Ruhrfisch 21:17, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Other users who endorse this summary

1. Modemac 17:36, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
2. Dcooper 19:07, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
3. MER-C 03:14, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
4. Will Beback · † · 05:34, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Response

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.

{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.}

Users who endorse this summary:

Outside view by Addhoc

OK, his user page probably should be modified and there isn't any excuse for incivility, however there is nothing wrong with making a user space copy of a deleted article. Also in the Peter Beter AfD, he gives his opinion of keep and discusses sources to demonstrate notability, which is acceptable. Addhoc 22:56, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Outside view of Dcooper

I'd like to add some more examples of the incivility of this user:

• Attacking admins
• Calling users idiots , . He loves to say duh to other editors.
• Attacks users who have warned him about his incivility:
• There are many examples on User talk:Eep² of him calling users nazis, wiktators, etc.

Eep2 needs to completely stop being uncivil. However, he has been warned before and based on his response I doubt that he will

Users who endorse this summary:

1. --Dcooper 13:13, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
2. -Will Beback · † · 19:35, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
3. --Coredesat 22:12, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
4. --Ruhrfisch 00:53, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
5. MER-C 05:10, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Outside view of MER-C

It's not stopping: I reverted some trolling/personal attacks directed at me by this user at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Miguel Condé - - only to have it restored with a vague threat posted on my talk page: . I don't see this user changing.

You don't revert other people's votes/comments, MER-C. And I don't appreciate User:Radiant reverting my votes/comments either. Yes, I called you a wiktator (that's a play on wiki+dictator, in case you don't know), because that's how I felt you were (and are) acting. So what? If it's not true, stop acting like one--that simple. I have contributed PLENTY to Misplaced Pages since 2004 (especially with my recent contributions to the Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Paranormal and don't need to be refrained/reprimanded by a bunch of power-mongering/-hungry admins (and their lackeys). Stop trying to bring down Misplaced Pages and start actually contributing to it without all the beaurocratic nonsense! Other people have "despise" userboxes about baseball teams and whatnot; why can't I have one about, who I believe, to be overzealous admins? Whatever happened to free speech? Lay off the unnecessary oppression, eh? -Eep² 05:58, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

User:Epeefleche just emailed about his experiences with Radiant doing the same thing: "He made a deletion decision (re category Jewish Figure Skaters) that I objected to. He has just removed my analytical discussion as to why I disagree with his decision from the discussion page, moving it to another page. And then went on to input his own, contrary "arguments" onto the discussion page." Time for Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Radiant? This is getting ridiculous... I replied that he comment here, on Radiant's talk page, and we will take further aformentioned action if this persists. -Eep² 06:46, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Users who endorse this summary:

1. MER-C 03:29, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
2. -Will Beback · † · 03:56, 8 May 2007 (UTC) (I've issued a level-3 NPA warning to the user.)

Discussion

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.