| Revision as of 22:55, 7 January 2015 view sourceKrano (talk | contribs)Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers16,241 edits →Statement by Avono: indent← Previous edit | Revision as of 22:57, 7 January 2015 view source Brustopher (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers5,111 edits →TarcNext edit → | ||
| Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
| Per ] Tarc should not be accusing other edtors of being hysterical. Tarc should definitely also not be trying to pressure editors he disagrees with, out of contributing. ] (]) 22:38, 7 January 2015 (UTC) | Per ] Tarc should not be accusing other edtors of being hysterical. Tarc should definitely also not be trying to pressure editors he disagrees with, out of contributing. ] (]) 22:38, 7 January 2015 (UTC) | ||
| {{ping|Tarc}} Starke's edits both inside and out of GamerGate have almost all been reverts. Classifying his non-GamerGate edits as "minor" when they are pretty much the same as his non-GamerGate edits is unhelpful. Starke also claims to have edited substantially as an IP editor in the past on his talk page. While the majority of his focus is on Gamergate, he is not an SPA. Also bringing up BLP violations as a reason why SPA's should be kicked out is irrelevant in this case, as the edit war in question did not involve BLP issues. Also also, none of this means you're allowed to tell editors they're not welcome. ] (]) 22:57, 7 January 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ===Discussion concerning Tarc=== | ===Discussion concerning Tarc=== | ||
| <small>''Statements must be made in separate sections. They may not exceed 500 ] and 20 diffs, except by permission of a reviewing administrator. <br>Administrators may remove or shorten noncompliant statements. Disruptive contributions may result in blocks.''</small> | <small>''Statements must be made in separate sections. They may not exceed 500 ] and 20 diffs, except by permission of a reviewing administrator. <br>Administrators may remove or shorten noncompliant statements. Disruptive contributions may result in blocks.''</small> | ||
Revision as of 22:57, 7 January 2015
Notice of obsolescence:
Community sanctions in this area of conflict have been superseded by an Arbitration Committee sanctions regime. As a result, this community sanctions-related page is now obsolete, is retained only for historical reference, and should not be modified. For more information about Arbitration Committee sanctions, see this page. For the specific Committee decision that rescinded or modified these community sanctions, see WP:ARBGG.
 Archives |
1, 2 |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 4 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Tarc
This request may be declined without further action if insufficient or unclear information is provided in the "Request" section below.
Requests may not exceed 500 words and 20 diffs (not counting required information), except by permission of a reviewing administrator.
Request concerning Tarc
- User who is submitting this request for enforcement
- Bosstopher (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) 22:38, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- User against whom enforcement is requested
- Tarc (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Search CT alerts: in user talk history • in system log
Additional comments by editor filing complaint
Tarc has been engaged in gross incivility against editors he has been edit warring with. While reverting an edit by User:Starke hathaway, Tarc wrote in the edit summary "Single-purpose-accounts are not welcome in this topic area." This is an innaccurate statement, as most of Starke's edits have been to non-GamerGate related topics. Yet even ignoring this, Tarc's comment is an unacceptable attempt to pressure an editor he disagrees with out of the editing process.
Tarc has also accused User:Shii of being in hysterics. Shii's so called "hysterical" actions were merely to revert Tarc's edit to the Draft claiming it to be against consensus, and noting that Tarc had not participating in discussion. How this could be considered hysterical I am not sure.
Per WP:NPA Tarc should not be accusing other edtors of being hysterical. Tarc should definitely also not be trying to pressure editors he disagrees with, out of contributing. Bosstopher (talk) 22:38, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
@Tarc: Starke's edits both inside and out of GamerGate have almost all been reverts. Classifying his non-GamerGate edits as "minor" when they are pretty much the same as his non-GamerGate edits is unhelpful. Starke also claims to have edited substantially as an IP editor in the past on his talk page. While the majority of his focus is on Gamergate, he is not an SPA. Also bringing up BLP violations as a reason why SPA's should be kicked out is irrelevant in this case, as the edit war in question did not involve BLP issues. Also also, none of this means you're allowed to tell editors they're not welcome. Bosstopher (talk) 22:57, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Discussion concerning Tarc
Statements must be made in separate sections. They may not exceed 500 words and 20 diffs, except by permission of a reviewing administrator.
Administrators may remove or shorten noncompliant statements. Disruptive contributions may result in blocks.
Statement by Tarc
Single purpose accounts are a plague upon this topic area, this has been well-noted and well-documented in the Arbcom case. Editors who are only here to advance a narrow point of view must not be allowed to disrupt a topic area rife with BLP violations.
- Look at Special:Contributions/Xander756, a SPA returns to heap more abuse, and had to be re-blocked and banned from the topic area.
- Look at Special:Contributions/Starke_hathaway, a SPA that just shows up to revert an edit. Account created Dec 3rd, has made minor edits outside of GG< the rest is stuff like this.
- Look at Special:Contributions/ToonLucas22, created Dec 8th, minor edits, including some vandalism to a random article. The a moment ago restores a bogus edit-war template that Avono had placed an hour earlier.
These are the kind of games, pov-pushing, and agenda-driven editing we face day in and day out around here. Tarc (talk) 22:47, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Statement by (username)
Statement by Avono
I also want to add that this user has been edit warning on the Draft Article while consensus was still developing in the talk page. . I can't remember there being a consensus against SPA's editing in the Draft Article therefore this is also WP:BITE. Avono (talk) 22:44, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Tarc: I count three reverts which justify the template. Avono (talk) 22:55, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Result concerning Tarc
This section is to be edited only by uninvolved administrators. Comments by others will be moved to the section above.
Categories: