Misplaced Pages

:Requests for comment/JzG2: 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 Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 11:18, 2 March 2008 edit Cla68 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers48,127 edits started RfCNext edit →
(No difference)

Revision as of 11:18, 2 March 2008

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: ~~~~), the page will be deleted. The current date and time is: 18:29, 29 December 2024 (UTC).

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

Statement of the dispute

Description

JzG is a dedicated administrator and editor who often does some very good work in helping to improve and administer Misplaced Pages. Unfortunately, however, he also consistently behaves in a manner — both as an editor and as an admin — which clearly and repeatedly violates several policies and guidelines, and is inappropriate and counterproductive for constructing an open content encyclopedia. Below are some examples of JzG's problematic behavior.

Evidence of disputed behavior

Incivility, personal attacks, and general rudeness

  1. Use of aggressive language to make a point ( and subsequent admin noticeboard complaint ), described as "uncivil", "pointy", and "unjustified" by Arbitrators (, , ), which sparked off a premature Arbitration committee (ArbCom) request
  2. Uses obscene language in response to questions from another admin (Viridae) in edit summaries ,
  3. 24 hour block for incivility (per the above "fuck off" comments to Viridae) ()
  4. Another use of obscene language in edit comments when dismissively removing others' comments from his user talk page.
  5. Still more severe incivility and personal attacks
  6. When evidence of JzG's chronic incivility and personal attacks was presented at Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Badlydrawnjeff, JzG responded, in part, with the following dismissive explanation:

    : told Jeff to fuck right off and would cheerfully have said the same to his face. He said "No, Guy wants it escalated and wants to be a dick about it, so we'll do it. Can't fault a guy for trying." I was outraged by that remark, absolutely outraged. And that is exactly how that comment would be understood side of the pond, ask David Gerrard.

  7. In edit summaries, calls editor (Cla68) "trolling" and "troll"
  8. Labels an admin as "WR's pet admin" to ascribe to him guilt by association. ,
  9. Removes comments querying an AFD from his talk page by three established users (AnonEMouse, Joe, and Viridae) with edit summary that says, "remove thread using Troll-B-Gon Professional 1.0" .
  10. Responds to comment from Rfwoolf on his talk page with "edit some articles or shut the fuck up you whining twat". , and calls him a "tossblanket" (), and an "arsehole" ()
  11. Deletes Sports trainer with the deletion summary "Fuck off, Bradles01"
  12. Calls a user a "cunt" -
  13. Another "fuck off" ()
  14. Attacks editors' judgment and accuses them of being exploited by associating them with banned users ()
  15. Accuses editor of being a "trolling sockpuppet" ()
  16. Calls an editor an "idiot" in the edit summary of a lengthy talk-page rant in which he criticizes the other editor for being "impolite".
  17. States on user page that editors who add fringe theories, and gives several examples, to articles are "idiots" and should be told to "Fuck off" .
  18. JzG to another editor on the Gary Weiss talk page: "You're sure doing a lot to give the impression that you prefer your friend Mr. Bagley to my friend Mr. Wales".
  19. Deletes other editors' comments in a dismissive and uncivil manner. , , , , , , and
  20. Describes another editor as a troll when asked to refactor the attacks/BLP violations made on the Matanmoreland arbitration case pages.
  21. Admonishes editor to "shut the fuck up you whiny little twat" . Discussed in ANI thread here
  22. Tells users "I want you to fuck off"
  23. Tells user "You are not welcome here. Now fuck off" ( (admin only, page now deleted)), then used rollback to reinsert the abuse ( (admin only))
  24. Dismissive of attempts by an editor to resolve a charged situation peacefully:
  25. Twice calls another editor an idiot in both the text and the edit summary "Fys is an idiot. And you can quote me on that.", " Fys, you are an idiot. And that's official.": ,
  26. A "fuck off" again:
  27. Calls another editor a "worthless twat"
  28. Warns editor about 3RR violation in a condescending and confrontational manner .
  29. Removes request from another admin to review a deletion JzG closed with the dismissive "not interested in your little digs" , then when the admin queries this , JzG misuses rollback to again remove the query .
  30. Posts "JzG's Terms of Service rules on his user talk page that warn, "If you act like a troll, I will probably ignore you and may tell you to fuck off. If you want something from me, your best bet is not to demand it on pain of shopping me to ArbCom, because that way is pretty much guaranteed to piss me off to the extent that I will do whatever I can to thwart your plans." (more)
  31. Removes comments by Viridae from his talk page with edit summaries, "Viridae is not welcome here" , "Go away and stay away" , and "Viridae's input is *remarkably* unwelcome" .
  32. Insults editor and creator of an article in AfD nomination
  33. Threatens editor in shouty and abusive edit summaries over "editorializing" (adding a comment in small text) ,
  34. Removes a warning with abusive edit summary
  35. "Shut the fuck up" on wikien-l, reprimanded
  36. Sarcastic and personal language used in announcing the block of a sockpuppet account
  37. Tells an editor "And another of the fringe pushers crawls out of the woodwork" and then tries to out the editor . Discussed at ANI .
  38. Protects his talk page with the edit summary "Tedious anon twat"

Personal attacks on living persons

  1. Ridicules another user's mental health and discusses confidential OTRS requests in a public forum
  2. JzG calls Judd Bagley an "obsessive troll" , a "net.kook", "absolutely not above forgery", a "vicious, agenda-driven troll" , "Bagley's lunacy" , "his (Bagley's) vile smear campaigns" , "harassment meme inventor" , "long history of abuse by Bagley" , "paranoid fantasies of banned abusers" , "targets of his harassment" , "Bagley uses disinformation and harassment against anyone who does not uncritically support his company" , "Bagley is a vicious hatemonger" , "Bagley's idiocy" , "People like Bagley. We've heard what he has to say, we've debated it, it's baseless - a tissue of lies from beginning to end" , "Posting links to Bagley's blog is simply wrong. Not because of BADSITES but because it is enabling a banned troll. We should not link to the ravings of a rebuffed POV-pusher" , "the delusional outpourings of sociopaths" , and "this malicious piece of shit-stirring by Bagley" .
  3. Describes a living person as a "vile agenda-driven troll" in the middle of an arbitration case , in the full knowledge that such characterisation is wholly inappropriate (used similar language , redacted it after being urged to do so)
  4. Outed a blocked user's real life identity on a publicly available mailing list
  5. Runs a personal Wiki website, advertised on his talk page, which contains, much like the sites he rails against, personal attacks (, ) and outing of Misplaced Pages editors (, ).

Abuse of admin privileges

General abuse
  1. Threatens editor (DanT) with a block for questioning another block, detailed here .
  2. Misuse of rollback to remove a complaint made by an editor (TlatoSMD - blocked now but in good standing at the time) against himself ()
  3. Self-blocks his own account during a "wikibreak" despite policy not permitting this.
  4. Makes two significant edits to a fully-protected article and
  5. Another significant edit to a fully protected article and then extends full protection for a month
  6. Is blocked for wheel warring with another admin in spite of warnings to stop
  7. Deleted Talk:Short and distort (a redirect) as a G5 when it was mentioned as evidence in the Matanmoreland/Sami Harris sockpuppetry investigation despite G5 not applying when there is significant contribution from other users.
  8. Admin deleted an article then said the recreation was written by him, although the two were almost identical . Adamantly asserted that the recreated version was written ab initio , but then back-pedalled on that assertion when faced with abundant evidence that it was an act of plagiarism. Note - this became a controversy due to JzG taking a deletion action 15 months after the article had been peaceably resolved.
  9. Reverted non-vandalism edits to an article then immediately fully protected it
  10. Speedy deleted 3 articles as "vanity" (not a criteria for speedy deletion) simultaneously outing the contributor's identity in 2 of the 3 deletion logs (, , )
  11. Speedy deleted article for "having the wrong tone" ()
  12. Indefinitely blocks Zibiki Wym with the edit summary "Claims to be a banned user. Banned means banned" . The user was not banned at that time. His previous account, MyWikiBiz, had been unblocked by Jimbo six days earlier .
  13. Blocked Privatemusings while engaged in dispute with same editor and may have breached confidence by forwarding personal information about Privatemusings . Discussed more here .
  14. Wheel-warring over the blocking of Fairchoice
  15. Misuse of rollback tool to remove comments he didn't agree with , & (admin only),
  16. Edits a protected policy page to remove content he doesn't agree with in a dispute over the policy content in which he is involved
  17. Speedy deleted Image:Larry Craig mugshot.jpg, and after it was undeleted by DRV consensus, speedy deleted it again. The image was again undeleted through DRV and later moved to Commons.
Biting newbies
  1. Makes indiscriminate blocks without warning of people editing a controversial article on Oxford Round Table and its AFD discussion, mislabelling at least two good faith users as "disruptive single purpose accounts" after failing to check editing history. Several of these blocks were soon reversed as unwarranted. See AN/I discussion, where JzG admits to an "itchy trigger finger", and User talk:JzG Please review the following block. When certain of these accounts were unblocked by admin Viridae, after being exonerated by checkuser and community consensus, JzG complained to ANI accusing Viridae of "having an agenda against me" ().
  2. Blocked a new user, Timjowers, indefinitely for adding links to articles, with no warnings or attempt to explain policy . Castigated by numerous users (, ), yet still refused to undo his actions or apologise. Eventually unblocked over a day later with discourteous block log summary .
  3. Posted abusive message to a new user's talk page () after blocking the user () and deleting their dictionary definition article - not a valid CSD, see ), then threatened the user with further blocks if the article was reposted . User never edited again.

Disruption

  1. Redirects "Turd burglar" to Gay and protected the redirect ( - admin only). Redirect deleted by another admin as "inappropriately mocking and derisive"
  2. Treats Misplaced Pages like a battleground and tries to bait the user whose attribution rights JzG violated into taking legal action
  3. Vandalises another users userpage multiple times, adding the word "infantile" to their list of interests (page temp restored to userspace): ,
  4. Removes links to Misplaced Pages Review even though most are linked in the appropriate context (raised on JzG's talk:), diffs , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Applicable policies and guidelines

  1. WP:POINT
  2. WP:BITE
  3. WP:EQ
  4. WP:CIVIL
  5. WP:NPA
  6. WP:BLP
  7. WP:ADMIN (specifically, administrator conduct)
  8. WP:OUTING

Evidence of trying and failing to resolve the dispute

These diffs represent just some of the attempts people have made to influence JzG's behaviour.

  1. Attempt by Cla68 to influence JzG's behavior
  2. Attempts by Neil to influence JzG's behavior
  3. Attempts by GTBacchus to influence JzG's behavior
  4. Attempts by Privatemusings to influence JzG's behavior
  5. Attempts by Messedrocker to influence JzG's behavior
  6. Attempt by Rlevse to influence JzG's behavior

Refusal to participate in dispute resolution

  1. Well-intentioned attempt by Cla68 to resolve the dispute and involve JzG in this RFC prior to activation was rudely dismissed

Summary

As the evidence listed above illustrates, JzG has behaved in an unacceptable manner for a considerable time, and continues to do so. Above, also, is a list of editors who have attempted to point out to JzG that his behavior is problematic and needs to stop, unfortunately to no avail. The purpose of this RfC, therefore, is to seek wider community input into addressing JzG's behavior with the goal being that he will stop behaving inappropriately and violating Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines.

Users certifying the basis for this dispute

{Users who tried and failed to resolve the dispute}

Other users who endorse this summary

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

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.

{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:

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.