Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/WLU-Mystar/Evidence

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Anyone, whether directly involved or not, may add evidence to this page. Please make a header for your evidence and sign your comments with your name.

When placing evidence here, please be considerate of the arbitrators and be concise. Long, rambling, or stream-of-conciousness rants are not helpful.

As such, it is extremely important that you use the prescribed format. Submitted evidence should include a link to the actual page diff; links to the page itself are not sufficient. For example, to cite the edit by Mennonot to the article Anomalous phenomenon adding a link to Hundredth Monkey use this form: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anomalous_phenomenon&diff=5587219&oldid=5584644] [1].

This page is not for general discussion - for that, see talk page.

Please make a section for your evidence and add evidence only in your own section. Please limit your evidence to a maximum 1000 words and 100 diffs, a much shorter, concise presentation is more likely to be effective. Please focus on the issues raised in the complaint and answer and on diffs which illustrate behavior which relates to the issues.

If you disagree with some evidence you see here, please cite the evidence in your own section and provide counter-evidence, or an explanation of why the evidence is misleading. Do not edit within the evidence section of any other user.

Be aware that the Arbitrators may at times rework this page to try to make it more coherent. If you are a participant in the case or a third party, please don't try to refactor the page, let the Arbitrators do it. If you object to evidence which is inserted by other participants or third parties please cite the evidence and voice your objections within your own section of the page. It is especially important to not remove evidence presented by others. If something is put in the wrong place, please leave it for the arbitrators to move.

The Arbitrators may analyze evidence and other assertions at /Workshop. /Workshop provides for comment by parties and others as well as Arbitrators. After arriving at proposed principles, findings of fact or remedies, Arbitrators vote at /Proposed decision. Only Arbitrators may edit /Proposed decision.

Contents


[edit] Evidence presented by WLU

In order of what I consider to be most to least disruptive categories. Diffs are presented in chronological order.

A complete listing of the evidence can be found on my talk page.

[edit] Mystar commenting on users, not content

[edit] Mystar editing another user's comments on a talk page

  • [29] Agree with arbitrator WLU 20:16, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
  • [30] - withdraw this one as evidence, I didn't read the page closely enough WLU 12:48, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
  • [31]
  • [32]
  • [33]
  • [34]
  • [35]
  • [36]
  • [37]
  • [38] also personal attack

[edit] Mystar's personal attacks/incivility against WLU (me)

[edit] Mystar's personal attacks/incivility against users other than WLU

[edit] Mystar wikistalking users (mostly WLU, me)

Three of these (Barbara Hambly, Uncaria Tomentosa and Lupus Erythematosus) led to long, aggravating 'collaboration', which could be better termed edit wars.

[edit] Mystar sockpuppeting

  • [84] admits to it [85] (skipping one edit he made). Since Mystar was not logged in he would have to check my contributions making this another example of wikistalking.

[edit] Mystar's punitive use of policy

  • [86] policy is deletion - page created only 12 hours previously, also wikistalking
  • [87] Cat's Claw
  • [88] Barbara Hambly

[edit] Miscellany

These are primarily comments on talk pages, I have not gone into extensive detail on the main page edits Mystar has done which I consider punitive, petty and of low quality, many of which seem like an effort to get the last word in on a series of edits.

An earlier version of the evidence page contained 'Meatpuppeting' as well, but since I have not seen any examples of this since he was told it is a breach of policy, I am not putting it up.

[edit] Evidence presented by Mystar

[edit] WLU’s bad faith

First off lets look at the current example of WLU’s bad faith efforts. When I asked kindly and politely, that she/he please alter her/his user page calling Goodkind a moron, WLU altered it by going further to inflame. Ultimately stating "removing the beam from my own eye" thusly acknowledging that fact that WLU knew the bad faith of her/his actions.[89],[90], [91]. When WLU asked for some kind of policy as to the incivility of her/his calling Goodkind a moron etc, I provided several links of such, which WLU dismissed [92], [93]. WLU admitting to editing the Sword of Truth pages as being negatively bias, "I think editing for content might be seen as tendentious, much like me editing a Sword of Truth article for content" [94]

[edit] Other Editor's assertion of WLU's page owning and insults

Mystar is a very blunt person after a point, and you passed that point a long time ago by refusing to yield your constant and consistent insistants on including material that the consensus has deemed inappropriate and un-encyclopedic. Not only have you presumed to be the only authority on editing and have "owned" pages, you have repeatedly been cited as deliberately stating that you want to see mystar banned, you want to see Terry Goodkind shamed on Wikipedia, and you are now trying to use the Wikipedia dispute resolution process to do so. [95]

[edit] WLU's incivility and attacks

Strongly worded attempt to get me to flame her/him [96]

Clearly we see that WLU has issues. We see WLU admitting to knowing that her/his actions violate policy "Now, I know this violates the NPA policy", yet WLU goes ahead and calls me names and does her/his best to try and incite a flame war. I have never once called anyone any names! Nor have I ever resorted to such needless and immature incivility as calling anyone "Coward" Simply because I choose to hold my response rather than get into a war of words...(As per Wikipedia policy, if I'm not mistaken) [97]


[98]

Also

Get a clue, you suck at this, read the policies and actually justify what you are editing. WLU 12:41, 17 September 2006 (UTC)”

More:

  • WLU “Just being catty at this point” [99]
  • WLU admitting to abuse “I think editing for content might be seen as tendentious, much like me editing a Sword of Truth article for content”. [100]
  • WLU Admonished for attacking me [101]
  • WLU admitting to snide behavior [102]

[edit] WLU admits to being a liar

Many times when I do edit I have often asked for clarification of an admin or seasoned editor on the Wikipedia-en IRC chat room. One such instance WLU stated that if I provided "any kind of proof.any kind" she/he would stop editing the Goodkind pages and vote to delete a specific page, I provided that proof, and We see WLU's snide retort.[103]

  • WLU admitting to breaking his/her word [104] “Your point about me breaking my word is tiresome, irrelevant and frankly laughable, and won't prevent me from editing the page further. I suggest not trusting me in the future, that might be best WLU 12:39, 2 October 2006 (UTC)”

The latest situation, the reality is that WLU deleted a users opinion and statement on a talk page. I saw this and was in the IRC chat room at the time, we (an admin and I) discussed it. There was no reason to revert jamhaw’s question and statement. Again WLU deems the pages her/his to do with as he/she pleases. WLU went apeshit and demanded to know why. SO I kindly and politely responded, with the help offer me by said ADMIN in the IRC chat room.

  • WLU admits to having his/her “other” IP blocked[105] “And in reply to your alter account comment, I have only one user account, the WLU one. I have access to two computers that I edit from (one of which has been blocked from anonymous editing, I assume because of the TG page” WLU 18:57, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • I have asked WLU to take a less hostile tone with me “Secondly WLU, I am going to ask politely that you take a less hostile tone with me. I stated the facts as they are. Call Tor if you wish, call Harper Collins UK and they will tell you not every publisher reports to them. If you don't like that, it is not my problem. I have source material that you are not privy to. So me I am free to make public, some I'm asked not to. I do think however that my well-known association with Goodkind' gives my points creditability. If you disagree, that's not my problem. Mystar 02:46, 1 September 2006 (UTC)”
  • WLU Acknowledging WLU’s attacks [106] “so I do apologies for the barbs that Mr. Willocx pointed out below. His comments are warranted and I am appropriately castigated. WLU 20:41, 31 August 2006 (UTC)”

I’m greatly amused at the “alleged” Wikistalking issue WLU is raising… Untrue! If I was Wikistalking WLU, then why am I not editing everything WLU is editing or attacking WLU? No rather I see an area of interest and need for clarification I edit. As is my privilege and right on Wikipedia. Though according to WLU, I'm the only one not allowed to edit where she/he does... As a matter of record WLU long ago openly stated that WLU is Wikistalking me:

“I am not completely innocent, I have insulted Mystar before and regularly check his contributions to make sure they are accurateWLU 12:55, 1 October 2006 (UTC) ”.

[107] [108]

  • 22:58, 8 October 2006 (hist) (diff) User talk:Werthead (I'm sick of Mystar)
  • 22:54, 8 October 2006 (hist) (diff) User talk:Paul Willocx (I'm sick of Mystar)
  • 22:52, 8 October 2006 (hist) (diff) User talk:Brendan Moody (I'm sick of Mystar)
  • 22:51, 8 October 2006 (hist) (diff) User talk:Omnilord
  • 22:51, 8 October 2006 (hist) (diff) User talk:Omnilord (I'm sick of Mystar)
  • 22:50, 8 October 2006 (hist) (diff) User talk:Runch (I'm sick of Mystar)
  • 22:49, 8 October 2006 (hist) (diff) User talk:NeoFreak (I'm sick of Mystar)

Lets be frank here. As you are aware of by now, you will not find any place by me where I've called anyone names. I have not been uncivil to WLU. To those I was at first uncivil to I have apologized and have refrained from further incidents. The issue is not me, I have no problem what so ever editing with WLU, I DO however submit to you that it is not "I" but rather WLU who clearly has the issue and is incapable of editing civilly where I do. It is unacceptable to assume that I be punished because of WLU's inability to be civil and allow my edits.

This whole case is just plain stupid. You as admins have said it and I’m saying it. As I read many many pages and edits, I see far far worse than anything I’ve done; yet the situation is simply as we have see. WLU has an issue, not me.

I will be adding more soon, I also have to deal with reality.

[edit] Evidence presented by {your user name}

[edit] {Write your assertion here}

Place argument and diffs which support your assertion; for example, your first assertion might be "So-and-so engages in edit warring", which should be the title of this section. Here you would show specific edits to specific articles which show So-and-so engaging in edit warring.

[edit] {Write your assertion here}

Place argument and diffs which support the second assertion; for example, your second assertion might be "So-and-so makes personal attacks", which should be the title of this section. Here you would show specific edits where So-and-so made personal attacks.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../r/e/q/Wikipedia%7ERequests_for_arbitration_WLU-Mystar_Evidence_1463.html"