Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Adamwankenobi

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

RFC closed due to the fact that user has been perm banned for vandalism, disruption, edit warring, and incivility as well as a number of other violations of wikipedia rules and guidelines. Jtkiefer T | @ | C ----- 00:41, September 7, 2005 (UTC)


Contents

[edit] Statement of the dispute

Adamwankenobi is a constant vandal and uncivil user.

[edit] Description

Adamwankenobi has had a past history of poor editing. No matter how good of an editor he is in regards to Star Wars, bad edits should not be forgiven. Rdsmith4 said that if he were to vandalize or disrupt Wikipedia again, that an admin should block him, and his comments on his user page and the Nazi comment are certainly disruptive. The evidence of disputed bahavior is only a selection of his poor edits; only one edit of George W. Bush is listed, while many others aren't, some of which are from sockpuppets. One sockpuppet has been reason to block people, so six should be reason to block on sight.

[edit] Evidence of disputed behavior

  1. Accusation of Nazism
  2. Admitting to vandalizing articles to be considered a rebel
  3. Admission to vandalizing for fun
  4. Admission to vandalizing to disrupt the process of Wikipedia
  5. Vandalization of GWB's article
  6. Bragging about getting away with vandalizing
  7. List of block(s) of TheAlternateReality
  8. List of block(s) of QuantumAdam
  9. List of IP's block(s)
  10. List of block(s) of Doodypie
  11. List of block(s) of Supershag11
  12. List of block(s) of Adamwankenobi
  13. An example of him vandalizing George W. Bush
  14. User page encourages the defacing of George W. Bush, makes inflammatory comments about Southerners, pedophile comment seems there to jerk on peoples' chain, To-Do list contains intention of increasing vandalism on the George W. Bush article
  15. First example of user page vandalism, promised to never do it again
  16. User page vandalism, broke promise
  17. Vandalism of article, vandalism making borderline-illegal statements
  18. Vandalizing Dick Cheney's page
  19. Continued vandalizing of Dick Cheney's page
  20. Repeated vandalizing of Dick Cheney's page
  21. Another borderline comment.
  22. Evidence of vote solicitation

[edit] Applicable policies

  1. Wikipedia:Civility
  2. Wikipedia:Sock puppet
  3. Wikipedia:Vandalism
  4. Wikipedia:No personal attacks

[edit] Evidence of trying and failing to resolve the dispute

  1. He was unblocked on the grounds that he would not be disruptive or vandalize, broke it
  2. Promised to not vandalize in order to get unblocked, broke promise

[edit] Users certifying the basis for this dispute

(sign with ~~~~)

  1. A Link to the Past (talk) 09:54, September 6, 2005 (UTC)
  2. A good editor who has an unfortunate tendency to vandalise for light entertainment worries me. Something needs to be done, although nothing too harsh. Rob Church Talk | Desk 10:01, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
  3. Adamwankenobi 10:22, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
  4. "A good editor who has an unfortunate tendency to vandalise for light entertainment worries me.". I'll say the identical. --Cool Cat Talk 11:53, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
  5. What worries me most is his apparent comtempt for consensus and the Wikipedia process and, as evidenced by his pride of his vandalism and sockpuppetry, his blatant opposition to the goals of Wikipedia. Coffee 12:01, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Other users who endorse this summary

(sign with ~~~~)

  1. — JIP | Talk 09:58, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
  2. Merovingian (t) (c) 10:27, September 6, 2005 (UTC)
  3. Lectonar 13:47, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
  4. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 23:04, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
  5. khaosworks (talk • contribs) 23:12, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
  6. Cryptic (talk) 23:58, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 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.

(To be honest, you could consider that I had seven sock puppets and one real account. My real account is obviously Adamwankenobi. My sockpuppets, that is, the four I created were: QuantumAdam, ILoveToEdit, SuperShadow, and TheAlternateReality. For a short period, my cousin was in on it with me, back when I got here in June. He created the three sock puppets: Supershag11, George Lucas, and Doodypie. I went ahead and put the template on them saying that they are suspects of being sock puppets of me. By the way, as it says in the appropriate article, I was not the person who put up the Nazi comment, I only agreed, and gave in to Godwin's Law. I have a right to agree with a remark, I suppose. And, my user page speaks the honest truth about me. Unlike many people in the world, I really don't have any problem telling people the full truth. My user page only reflects that. The remark of mine on being a pedophile, that's honest, I won't deny it. What is wrong with telling things about yourself? The user page stuff on Jimbo was, as you will see on that page, a little joke toward Jimbo. I didn't think everyone would get all uptight over a joke. Jimbo himself even hints on his page that he appreciates these sorts of things occasionally. I changed the name of his page from Jimbo Wales to "Jumbo Whales" as a play on his name. Adamwankenobi 09:31, 6 September 2005 (UTC))

Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~~~~):

    1. Adamwankenobi 09:51, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 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.

Added a comment on an AfD page indicating that he believes that admins are Nazis: [1]. When I objected to his characterization ([2]), he shrugged it off ([3]) as if it were no big deal. Zoe 08:05, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~~~~):

    1. Adamwankenobi 09:51, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

All signed comments and talk not related to a vote or 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.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../r/e/q/Wikipedia%7ERequests_for_comment_Adamwankenobi_8dbb.html"