Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Sarner

< Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) at 12:01, 2 December 2021 (Fixed Lint errors in signatures. (Task 2)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 12:01, 2 December 2021 by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) (Fixed Lint errors in signatures. (Task 2))(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

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: 11:42, 20 October 2006 (UTC)), the page will be deleted. The current date and time is: 07:06, 28 December 2024 (UTC).

USERNAME (talk · contribs · logs)

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

Statement of the dispute

This is a summary written by users who dispute this user's conduct. Users signing other sections ("Response" or "Outside views") should not edit the "Statement of the dispute" section. User:Sarner has been disruptive on the Bowlby article and Candace Newmaker article. He has a history of being banned previoulsy on the Bowlby page for being disruptive and uncivil. He is engaged in similiar behavior. He refuses to follow Misplaced Pages dispute resolution procedures despite several requests from me and other editors. He will not follow the clear consensus on both those pages.

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.} User:sarner reverts to his version without engaging in consensus buildinig or considering that other editors disagree with him. He has a vested interest in his position as he is a leader of the advocacy group Advocates for Children in Therapy (ACT) and he wants all mention of that group deleted from the Candace Newmaker article. He is author of the book used as a reference on that page. His work as an advocate for ACT has led him to have a seeming vendetta against certain therapy methods.

Evidence of disputed behavior

(Provide diffs. Links to entire articles aren't helpful unless the editor created the entire article. Edit histories also aren't helpful as they change as new edits are performed.)

Applicable policies and guidelines

{list the policies and guidelines that apply to the disputed conduct}

NPOV
Civil
Disruptive Editing
Tendentious Editing
followoing Misplaced Pages dispute resolution procedure and policies
adhering to the consensus view
adhering to the results of a poll
considering mediation or other appropriate form of resolution
continued disruptive behavior by continued reverts.

Evidence of trying and failing to resolve the dispute

(provide diffs and links)

Users certifying the basis for this dispute

{Users who tried and failed to resolve the dispute}

Other users who endorse this summary

JonesRD_talk 21:00, 20 October 2006 (UTC)...well I have suggested on the various talk pages that he participate in dispute resolution procedures such as mediation or a poll...

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.

User:Sarner has been disruptive on the Bowlby article and Candace Newmaker article. He has a history of being banned previoulsy on the Bowlby page for being disruptive and uncivil. He is engaged in similiar behavior. He refuses to follow Misplaced Pages dispute resolution procedures despite several requests from me and other editors. He will not follow the clear consensus on both those pages. 11:42, 20 October 2006 (UTC)