Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/KDRGibby
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Case Opened on 01:58, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Case Closed on 06:42, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
Please do not edit this page directly unless you wish to become a participant in this request. (All participants are subject to Arbitration Committee decisions, and the ArbCom will consider each participant's role in the dispute.) Comments are very welcome on the Talk page, and will be read, in full. Evidence, no matter who can provide it, is very welcome at /Evidence. Evidence is more useful than comments.
Arbitrators will be working on evidence and suggesting proposed decisions at /Workshop and voting on proposed decisions at /Proposed decision.
Contents |
[edit] Involved parties
- KDRGibby (talk · contribs)
- Natalinasmpf (talk · contribs)
- 172 (talk · contribs)
- Rhobite (talk · contribs)
- BernardL (talk · contribs)
- Confirmation that all parties are aware of the request
KDRGibby has been informed. [1]
- Confirmation that other steps in dispute resolution have been tried
Preliminary ad hoc mediation has been tried by BostonMA, who tried to get us all to work together. Didn't work. Wikipedia:Requests for comment/KDRGibby has been filed, but although it is still going on, it has been open for about a month and it is inconclusive. KDRGibby has rejected mediation. [2] Twice. [3]
[edit] Statement by Natalinasmpf
My first encounter with the user was in the article communism. As one knows, these articles tend to be heated, and I inadvertently became the second person (as it takes two to tango), and commenced a bitter dispute. I regret that, for being too quick on the revert function, however, even after requesting he discuss the matter, he still edited abrasively, violating WP:CIV and WP:NPA. He was blocked for 3RR, his first time. I then discovered that beforehand, he had been edit warring at Liberalism and classical liberalism, and several other political topics. I then initiated an RFC. BostonMA tried commendably to get us both to work together, and stop the dispute, but to no avail. It was no longer just about the content: KDRGibby is a very abrasive user who uses brute force to try to get things done on Wikipedia. He does not see value in discussion. When he does get into discussion, he accuses other editors of having vested interests, ie. "you don't want the world to know about the a free market system that works!", and makes allegations of cabal, a clear example of not assuming good faith about other users. He cites his university degrees and qualifications as a way to assert his authority in disputes, and insulted other users' teaching career. This same behaviour has been applied at Wal-Mart. He calls any editors he is in dispute with "logically inconsistent", over and over again, which is not a personal attack per se, but is used frequently as an insult. He has made reference to my age. Even in the very RFC itself he continued to attack other users rather than try to agree to a compromise. I personally want one, but I'm not sure about Gibby. He has violated WP:POINT a few times, by spitefully disrupting a page when attempting to prove what he perceives as lack of logic in our arguments. He treats edit warring and disruption as a game, frequently adding emoticons such as ":P" at the end of very serious matters. We all have faults, and this dispute is ugly, but I feel that Gibby doesn't want to compromise in any way, so I have no choice but to make this request. The RFC doesn't seem to have worked out. Gibby has antagonised several other users, such as User:Electionworld (who is the same as User:Wilfried Derksen) and User:Tznkai, who may join the case later. There are also many third parties who have tried to work with him, with little success. More recently, he has been blocked for a second 3RR violation on Communism, and a third one at Wal-Mart. He also repeatedly removes comments he doesn't like from his user talk page. This shows apparent dissonance and is a sign of KDRGibby's severe problems with the community. Note, he's just done it again with removing the notice concerning arbitration [4] (and again - [5]): I feel that this is a problem because a user talk page is needed to inform other users about his behaviour, not merely communicate to KDRGibby. The final thing is that he has clearly ignored this arbitration request, choosing to make several strings of edits without response to this.
[edit] Statement by Rhobite
My conflict with KDRGibby is limited to Wal-Mart, where he has been removing a POV-section tag from a section he wrote, despite outstanding POV issues on the talk page. E.g. [6] [7] After I replaced the POV tag a number of times and reiterated my complaint on the talk page, he said "I'm repeating again for your thick skull" [8]. He was recently blocked for a 3RR violation because he insisted on placing bullet points before every paragraph he wrote. After the block, he wrote this on his talk page: "I hate the goddamn admins on wikipidia they are so fucking stupid!" [9]. Called everyone who disagrees with him "leftist bully vandals" [10]. "Calling them stupid leftist fuckers however is a personal attack...as much as I'd like to use that apt term, I have not." [11] Rhobite 15:19, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
I should add that KDRGibby vandalized economics of fascism on January 14: [12] Rhobite 20:08, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
January 16, personal attack by KDRGibby "GIVE SPECIFIC REASONS ASSHOLE!" [13] Rhobite 00:12, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Statement by BernardL
My first encounter with KDRGibby came on liberalism after he had inserted a quote by Friedman about the industrial revolution. There was no major conflict at the time, however a conflict followed when 2 days later he showed up at Participatory Economics and enlarged the article by roughly 30% with paraphrased views of Friedman, who has not written about Parecon, on the impossibility of market alternatives, ever. Thus, my objection with his behaviour stems from the recent conflict over the parecon page. I would argue that his behaviour demonstrates bad faith and a bad spirit for wikipedia. My explanation is available in evidence...
[edit] Statement by KDRGibby
[edit] Preliminary decisions
[edit] Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter (9/0/0/0)
- Accept. James F. (talk) 22:09, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
- Accept Fred Bauder 17:15, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
- Accept - David Gerard 22:01, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
- Accept ➥the Epopt 04:20, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- Accept. —Matthew Brown (T:C) 05:21, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- Accept. Sam Korn (smoddy) 17:42, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- Accept. Jayjg (talk) 23:38, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- Unrecuse. - SimonP 18:58, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
- Accept by unrecusing. Charles Matthews 08:42, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Temporary injunction (none)
[edit] Final decision
All numbering based on /Proposed decision (vote counts and comments are there as well)
[edit] Principles
[edit] Personal attacks and incivility
1) Users are expected to be reasonably courteous to other users, especially with respect to contested issues, see Wikipedia:No personal attacks and Wikipedia:Civility. Users who habitually violate these policies may be banned from editing, either in a certain field or from all pages.
- Passed 10-0
[edit] Tendentious editing
2) Users who engage in sustained, aggressive point-of-view editing may be banned from affected articles, in extreme cases from the entire site.
- Passed 10-0
[edit] Assume good faith
3) Users are expected to assume good faith with respect the other users, who share the common goal of creating a useful reference work. See Wikipedia:Assume good faith.
- Passed 10-0
[edit] Neutral Point Of View
4) Wikipedia:Neutral point of view contemplates fair expression of all significant points of view which relate to a subject.
- Passed 10-0
[edit] Extreme points of view
5) Provided they are reasonably courteous and conform to Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines, users who hold views from any political viewpoint are valued members of the Wikipedia community.
- Passed 10-0
[edit] Editing controversial articles
6) There is a special burden imposed on those who choose to edit hotly contested articles. Extra effort must be made to be courteous, communicate adequately with other users, and use reliable sources. Those who are unable to function productively in that context may be banned from such editing.
- Passed 10-0
[edit] Edit-warring
7) Habitual edit-warring is unacceptable. Content disputes are settled by patient negotiation on talk pages.
- Passed 10-0
[edit] Findings of fact
[edit] Discourtesy and personal attacks by KDRGibby
1) KDRGibby has been incivil numerous times, making extensive personal attacks [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/KDRGibby/Evidence#KDRGibby_is_uncivil, Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/KDRGibby/Evidence#Incivility.2C_hostility_and_disrespect_of_editors, Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/KDRGibby/Evidence#Evidence_presented_by_.7BTrulyTory.7D Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/KDRGibby/Evidence#KDRGibby_violates_WP:CIVIL, Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/KDRGibby/Evidence#Personal_attacks_at_Che_Guevara, Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/KDRGibby/Evidence#Evidence_provided_by_MisterHand and Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/KDRGibby/Evidence#Evidence_by_William_M._Connolley, see also Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/KDRGibby#Making_incivil_or_personal_attacks.
- Passed 10-0
[edit] KDRGibby's complaints
2) KDRGibby feels that Wikipedia engages in a number of unfair practices which prevent fair expression of the points of view he advances, see User:KDRGibby, also User talk:KDRGibby#List of Wiki Bullies. He comments, "Wikipedia is run and edited by a lot of logically inconsistant stupid %$#@!*".
- Passed 10-0
[edit] KDRGibby consistently fails to assume good faith
3) KDRGibby sees his experience on Wikipedia as a struggle with a phalanx of hostile editors and administrators, see User:KDRGibby and Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/KDRGibby/Evidence#Accusations of vested interests.
- Passed 10-0
[edit] Tendentious editing
4) KDRGibby has engaged in aggressive point of view editing with respect to articles such as Communism and Wal-Mart. [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] [28] [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] [34] [35] [36]
- Passed 10-0
[edit] Edit warring
5) KDRGibby has a history of edit warring, having been blocked seven times as of 04:33, 30 January 2006 (UTC) for violation of the three-revert rule. (See block log.) Selected diffs: [37], [38], [39], [40].
- Passed 10-0
[edit] KDRGibby has removed large blocks of information
6) In at least two instances KDRGibby has blanked large sections of a hotly disputed article rather than engaging in reasoned discourse. [41] and [42].
- Passed 10-0
[edit] KDRGibby has acted immaturely
7) In at least one instance KDRGibby has violated Wikipedia:Don't disrupt Wikipedia to make a point by replacing {{totally disputed}} with {{Fluffy Bunnies}} [43].
- Passed 10-0
[edit] Remedies
Note: All remedies that refer to a period of time, for example to a ban of X months or a revert parole of Y months, are to run concurrently unless otherwise stated.
[edit] KDRGibby placed on personal attack parole
1) KDRGibby is placed indefinitely on personal attack parole. He may be briefly blocked if he makes personal attacks, up to a week in the event of repeat offenses. After 5 blocks the maximum block shall increase to one year.
- Passed 10-0
[edit] ... and prohibited from keeping personal attacks
1.1) KDRGibby is placed indefinitely on personal attack parole. He may be briefly blocked if he makes personal attacks, up to a week in the event of repeat offenses. He is also prohibited from keeping personal attacks, such as User talk:KDRGibby#List of Wiki Bullies in his userspace, and may be briefly blocked for violations, up to a week in the event of repeat offenses. After 5 blocks the maximum block shall increase to one year.
- Passed 8-0 with 1 abstention
[edit] KDRGibby placed on Probation
2) KDRGibby is placed on Wikipedia:Probation. Any administrator, in the exercise of their judgement for reasonable cause may ban him from any article or talk page which he disrupts by inappropriate editing. Such bans may include all articles and talk pages which deal with certain areas, such as Communism. KDRGibby must be notified on his talk page of any ban and the ban and the basis for it logged at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/KDRGibby#Log of blocks and bans.
- Passed 10-0
[edit] KDRGibby placed on general probation
3) KDRGibby is placed on general probation. Any three administrators, in the exercise of their judgement for reasonable cause, may ban him from Wikipedia if his general pattern of activity is unacceptably disruptive. Such a ban and the basis for it shall logged at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/KDRGibby#Log of blocks and bans.
- Passed 9-0
[edit] Enforcement
[edit] Enforcement by block
1) Should KDRGibby violate any ban he maybe briefly blocked, up to a week in the event of repeat offenses, After 5 blocks the maximum block shall be increased to one year. Blocks to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/KDRGibby#Log of blocks and bans
- Passed 10-0
[edit] Log of blocks and bans
Here log any block, ban or extension under any remedy in this decision. Minimum information includes name of administrator, date and time, what was done and the basis for doing it.
- In the interests of keeping this uncluttered and easy to follow, please take any discussion of the contents of this log to the talk page
[edit] Blocks
- 22:23, 1 March 2006 User:Tom harrison
- 21:23, 6 March 2006 User:David Gerard
- 01:14, 7 March 2006 User:Alai
- Period: 3 hours
- Reason: blocked "Incivility, contra to arbitration outcome, PA parole"[50]
- 22:23, 7 March 2006 User:R. Koot
- Period: 24 hours
- Reason: 3RR on participatory economics [51]
- There is also an associated one year ban (see below)
- 02:21, 8 March 2006 User:NSLE
- Period: Unblocked and re-blocked for 31 hours. Talk page protected.
- Reason: this personal attack
- Five blocks having been made under the various remedies, the maximum block length now stands at one year
- NSLE (T+C) at 02:19 UTC (2006-03-14)
- Period: 3 days and 3 hours. Talk page protected.
- Reason: Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbitration/KDRGibby#Violation_of_page_ban
- 14:28, 18 March 2006 (UTC) User:Jpgordon
- Period: One month.
- Reason::Repeated violation of page ban at Participatory economics
- 03:45, 15 May 2006 User:Tony Sidaway
- Period: One month
- Reason: Breach of personal attack parole, and edit warring
[edit] Bans
- 22:23, 7 March 2006 User:R. Koot
- After a 3RR violation, KDRGibby was banned from editing participatory economics for one year.
- 23:41, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
After KDRGibby removed well sourced statements from Cuba on the stated grounds that they are "original research" [52] [53], Tony Sidaway banned him from editing that article. This is a soft ban, subject to review, and may be rescinded by any administrator at any time. The ban does not apply to comments on Talk:Cuba.
- 05:06, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
- Above ban on editing Cuba rescinded by jpgordon.
- 03:45, 15 May 2006 User:Tony Sidaway
- Banned from editing Cuba for edit warring.
- 14:28, 16 May, 2006
- Tony Sidaway opens discussion on invoking KDRGibby's General Probation and banning him from Wikipedia [54]
- 23:34, 16 May 2006
