Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 17:12, 29 December 2006

User:Sir Nicholas de Mimsy-Porpington

Statement of the dispute

Sir Nicholas de Mimsy-Porpington (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has misused the blocking policy. This administrator has also abused the deletion tools and status of administrator to close WP:AFD discussion with a decision that was consistently counter to consensus. Numerous instances of incivility towards several other editors.

Description

Nick blocked User:Malber without notice while he was personally involved in a dispute with Malber re RfA questions; Nick blocked User:Kuntan for his username without discussion despite that the status of the username as being offensive is in dispute.

Administrator has displayed numerous instances of prematurely and against consensus closing deletion debates. Consistent assumption of bad faith against deletion discussion participants. Consistent incivil attitude when questioned about administrative actions.

Evidence of disputed behaviors

• Blocking policy
  • Punitive block on User:Malber:
  • Threatening a further punitive block after original block was overturned.
  • Aware Kuntan not a username violation, use of obscene photo: (scroll to last issue, **"Kuntan prematurely deleted")--see below instead, since this was deleted:

• Deletion policy
  • Deletion of List of big-bust models and performers against consensus.
  • Close with Keep against consensus in Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Dave Gilbert (game designer) 1.
  • Close against unanimous keep consensus `
  • Closed delete even though significant information to contest deletion was brought up.
  • Clear No Consensus (50/50 split) closed as delete
  • Closed delete against consensus to keep.
  • Closed delete, should have been a no consensus close.
  • Closed delete, vote was 2:1 against deletion.
• Civility policy
  • Incivility towards fellow administrator.
  • Misappropriation of policy talk page to perform an incivil RfC/character assasination against an editor.
  • Posting offensive image on talk page:

Powers misused

• • Blocking tools, deletion tools, using status as administrator to push personal opinion and position in deletion debates.

Applicable policies

1. WP:BLOCK
2. WP:DELETE
3. WP:CIVIL

Evidence of trying and failing to resolve the dispute

(re Malber block: Amarkov's comments, Malber's comments. Nick's "apology" a PA on Malber. Re Kuntan, SA Jordan's comments on Nick's talkpage: and the username RFC.)

I was blocked which was eventually overturned. I requested an apology from the administrator, however NHN has refused to offer one. I can let the block go, I can even forgive the incivil actions toward me and his constant labeling of every edit I make as "disruptive," but NHN's actions in AfD debates are what trouble me the most. There have been numerous instances where AfD discussion participants have kindly asked NHN for an explanation and he has responded in a less than civil manner. The following are diffs from his own and others' talk page.

I was hesitant to participate in this RfC because I foresee NHN attempting to bring my prior mistakes and bad decisions into the discussion. I respectfully request that if he does that anyone reviewing this will disregard his attempt at the Chewbacca defense and stick to the issues at hand. I am not seeking any redress of NHN's actions against me, but I feel that some comment and/or action should be taken on NHN's abuse of the administrative tools with regards to deletion and the "status" of being an administrator and the issues of civility when dealing with the community. —Malber (talk • contribs) 05:34, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Users certifying the basis for this dispute

1. —Malber (talk • contribs) 05:34, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
2. User:Cindery {talk contribs}05:45, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
3.  ALKIVAR™ ☢ 10:15, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Other users who endorse this statement

Outside view from Dakshayni:

Outside view by Samir

Kuntan is a troll and Nick's username block was entirely appropriate. His user name, among other meanings, references child molestation in Malayalam. He edited the now-deleted article Kuntayithote early in his editorial career with the following: "Kuntan in Malayalam is a term for a boy or young man kept by older man for sodomy." He vandalized the pages of editors who disagreed with him: . He made tendentious edits and then mocked the users who he disagreed with: . He trolled AfD's and admittedly made hoax articles based on the indecent interpretation of his username: . Kuntan has since appeared in a series of sockpuppets that have trolled user pages, ANI, RfA, and other venues.
The username block is entirely apt and I strongly question the integrity of any RfC that is asking for an administrator to comment on the blocking of a clearcut troll -- Samir धर्म 10:55, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Users who endorse this summary:

1. Sam Blanning 12:19, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
2. Duja► 12:31, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
3. I just saw the deleted article and the very first edit to that article by Kuntan clearly states the intended meaning of Kuntan. And judging from his sockpuppet army, he seems a clear troll — Lost 13:35, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
4. Srikeit 13:37, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
5. This block is so obviously warranted, it makes it clear Malber is just here because he's mad, not because there's much of a problem. It's also interesting that Nick's incivility, while it could/should be improved, is far less severe than Malber's. Yet another case of trying to point out someone else's problems without having one's own house in order. - Taxman 13:46, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
6. An admitted troll, who's name I well remember. I tagged the article in the first place, and ended up wasting a lot of time with his games. --ArmadilloFromHellGateBridge 13:56, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
7. Is blocking trolls controversial now?Bakaman 17:09, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Outside view by Samuel Blanning

Of the disputed AfD closings:

• List of big-bust models and performers was overturned after being nominated at DRV, relisted, and the AfD speedy closed.
• Dave Gilbert (game designer) is currently at DRV. Opinions are split.
• Ice Age (band) was overturned after being relisted and kept at AfD.
• Critical Mass (Catholic rock) was restored after new evidence was presented; a deletion review had one endorsement and one overturn of the original discussion.
• Scene (subculture) has not been nominated for DRV.
• Hilal Khashan was overturned after being relisted and kept at AfD.
• Graving has not been nominated for DRV.
• W00t is currently on DRV with a majority for endorsement.

So out of 8 that supposedly justify an RfC, 2 were not even nominated (so we can assume there is no case against the closing), 1 is heading for an endorsement, 1 was split but without particular disapproval against the closing, 1 is heading the same way. I do not believe the remaining 3 constitute a serious problem with Nicholas' AfD closing, although there were a few errors that I'm sure he will learn from. (That does not include the first closing in the list, incidentally). He appears to have a much better grasp of AfD closing than the RfC requester, who refers to AfD here as a vote, which it is not, and claims in all all but one of the AfDs listed that Nicholas was at fault because he closed against the numbers.

Users who endorse this summary:

1. Duja► 12:31, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
2. Also, I can't see anything positive that will come of this, so can we just get back to editing articles? Taxman 13:46, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
3. — Lost 13:50, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
4. I think the Scene (subculture) AFD is an example of good judgement. All of the keep !votes were basically "I like it" or "it does exist!" 2 or 3 questionable AFD closers makes for bad support of "admin abuse." ---J.S 17:02, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
5. Bakaman 17:10, 29 December 2006 (UTC)