User:Dicklyon/RFArDreamGuy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] User:DreamGuy conduct, photoshopping content, etc.
- Initiated by Dicklyon at 05:06, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Involved parties
- Dicklyon (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log) (bringing the case)
- DreamGuy (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log) (person whose conduct and attitude are being complained about)
- Cool Blue (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log) (mediator of failed/closed case, receiving end of many messages from DreamGuy)
- Confirmation that all parties are aware of the request
- General notification on the open RFC about DreamGuy to alert all active participants there.
- Notification of DreamGuy on his talk page.
- Confirmation that other steps in dispute resolution have been tried
- Well documented in Wikipedia:Requests for comment/DreamGuy 2#Evidence_of_trying_and_failing_to_resolve_the_dispute
- More recent attempt via Mediation Cabal: Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-08-17 Photo editing (closed due to DreamGuy's objection)
[edit] Statement by User:Dicklyon
The currently open conduct RFC (Wikipedia:Requests for comment/DreamGuy 2) is the best description of the conduct problem. Through continual incivility, DreamGuy manages to alienate every editor that he comes into the slightest conflict with. He has convinced himself that his position is always right, and therefore the others are just "problem editors", justifying his conduct. His statements indicate that he is in denial that any part of his problem with "problem editors" is due to his conduct.
At the end of the talk page there, he firmly rejects our last attempt at content mediation as well, involving a long-running dispute about the use of the term "photoshopping" for photo editing, which he started on March 9, 2007 by blanking the photoshopping article and redirecting it to Adobe Photoshop. All other editors of those articles have converged on a redirect to a small section in photo editing, but there he insists on removing the referenced content and replacing it with a statement that photoshopping simply means using Adobe Photoshop.
Many others who signed on to the conduct RFC had similar complaints about his involvement in articles they care about. I am willing to stipulate that he was sometimes on the "right" side of disputes, in that a final consensus was reached that agreed pretty much with his position. However, his incivil involvement appears to have always made it harder to get there, not easier. On the photoshopping question, however, he is clearly in a minority of one against a number of editors who have made good faith efforts to understand and study his policy concerns (undue weight, neologism, reliable source, etc.) and his position, and to a mediate and reach a consensus. His participation in such processes seems to be a simple rejection, calling everyone names for disagreeing and going about it all wrong. Few editors have yet found a way to work with him, other than to give in and let him have his way. Numerous complaints, three conduct RFCs, several AN/I complaints, etc. have not led to anything like resolution or progress.
DreamGuy also likes to "ban" people from his talk page, claiming "harassment" when they try to discuss things with him, or when they warn him that they're going to file a complaint, etc. He routinely removes talk comments with no response other than an abusive or dismissive edit summary. His User talk:DreamGuy page states his bad-faith attitude clearly: "Note: If you are here to leave personal attacks, false accusations of vandalism, a long tirade about why your cat photo or article about yourself should be left alone as you and only you wanted, nonsensical rationalizations of why vampires, ancient astronauts, werewolves, "creation science" and so on should be treated as completely real and so forth, do not bother, as I'll either just remove them right away or simply point you to the appropriate Wikipedia policy which you should have read in the first place."
This kind of conduct costs wikipedia tremendously in terms of the time, effort, and good will of good editors who deal with DreamGuy. His mode of interaction needs to be changed or stopped.
- What I would like this arbitration case to achieve if accepted?
-
- DreamGuy should as a minimum agree (and be held under penalty of blocking) to stop being incivil, to stop asserting a consensus when he's alone against a majority, to carry on dispute discussions on talk pages (including his own) instead of in edit summaries, and to respond as if other editor's actions are in good faith.
- DreamGuy should be compelled to remove the blatant assertion of his own assumptions of bad faith from his user talk page. Hopefully, a genuine assumption of good faith can be found to underlie these conduct changes.
- DreamGuy should agree to mediation of the photoshopping/photo editing/Adobe Photoshop dispute, pending finding a mediator who knows nothing of him or his history. With respect to this and other content disputes, he must stop asserting that the mediation process is worse than the deadlock that it is intended to help solve, or that other editors don't respect policies.
[edit] Statement by User:DreamGuy
[edit] Statement by User:CoolBlue
[edit] Clerk notes
- (This area is used for notes by non-recused Clerks.)
