Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-01-16 Deathrock & Deathrock fashion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Request for cabal mediation 1.1 Request Information 1.2 Response by Leyasu 1.3 Comments by others 1.4 Mediator response

[edit] Request for cabal mediation

[edit] Request Information

Request made by: Jessica via e-mail; questionnaire below filled out by myself from information out of Jessica's request. --NicholasTurnbull | (talk) 19:47, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Where is the issue taking place?

Deathrock and Deathrock fashion.

Who's involved?

User:Leyasu.

What's going on?

Inappropiate comments made by Leyasu:

• calling me "Darling" (I don't know him so it's patronizing and creepy)
• calling Deathrock "We Wear Halloween Costumes Rock"
• calling Deathrockers "elitists"
• calling the term Deathrock itself a "neologism"
• using inflamatory language such as "the whole thing reeks of neoglism (sic) and term coining" etc.

Second are the revisions he keeps making in the Deathrock article which cannot be verified - he provides no links to verifying sources, instead saying things like "...i simply cite most anyone involved in the so-called death rock and goth communities." In a few cases, he has eliminated information which was verified by external sources and placed his opinion instead.

When I told him I would not get into an argument with him, he responded by saying accusing him of being argumentative "counts as a personal attack".

Other users (from the Gothic Metal article) requested informal mediation for Leysau so I'm not the only one who has problems with him. I am also not pleased that the Gothic Metal article (where he is one of the editors) goes into detail explaining how "faggoth" is a term which is meant to be applied to Goths, not Gothic Metal fans, but I'm afraid to bring it up on the talk page out of fear of retaliation.

What would you like to change about that?

All I want from Leyasu is for him to stop making inflammatory or disrespectful comments towards me and the other editors of the Deathrock and Gothic Music articles, to and stop editing the Deathrock article unless he can actually cite sources instead of his opinion.

[edit] Response by Leyasu

What's going on?

Inappropiate comments made by Leyasu:

• calling me "Darling" (I don't know him so it's patronizing and creepy)

I apologise if this was taken wrongly. I tend to refer to most females wth terms such as babe, darling, sweetheart, mi-lady, etc. This is common place for me and my sisters, and i didnt know that the user had a problem with this, as i do respect some people feel uncomfortable with it. Now i know, i can watch my toungue.

• calling Deathrock "We Wear Halloween Costumes Rock"

This was meant as an example as part of a sentence, and picking and chosing parts of the sentence somewhat changes the meaning.

• calling Deathrockers "elitists"

See above.

• calling the term Deathrock itself a "neologism"

Again, in explaining that how the term Death Rock was being used was a neoglism, in that it was advertising certain bands a fan liked from one genre of music, and dispelling another. Also drawing distinction without distinction. Such as, per say, someone saying 'Erotica Movies are not Pornography but i wont explain how'.

• using inflamatory language such as "the whole thing reeks of neoglism (sic) and term coining" etc.

This is the way i talk, i apologise if it offends anyone, but this is the way people talk that im used to. I dont consider this inflamatory, if other people get offended by the way i talk, then they need to learn themselfs how to appreciate the language used by people from differing places.

Second are the revisions he keeps making in the Deathrock article which cannot be verified - he provides no links to verifying sources, instead saying things like "...i simply cite most anyone involved in the so-called death rock and goth communities." In a few cases, he has eliminated information which was verified by external sources and placed his opinion instead.

Sources provided that argue against what i say are normally minute or non existant, against claims that 'Every Goth does this' or similar such fallacys when the user themselves has claimed they have no connection to this Gothic scene. Somewhat an Oxymoron when someone claims they have no knowledge of something, yet then try to tell someone who how things work in it?

When I told him I would not get into an argument with him, he responded by saying accusing him of being argumentative "counts as a personal attack".

She said that i was trolling, and i was bad faith editing and my only concern was to ruin Wikipedia. When i pointed out that ive helped revise pages and most of the comments on my user info are other conflicting ideas on how to reach the same goal as another user, the lady claiming she didnt want to argue then starts getting nasty with me.

Other users (from the Gothic Metal article) requested informal mediation for Leysau so I'm not the only one who has problems with him. I am also not pleased that the Gothic Metal article (where he is one of the editors) goes into detail explaining how "faggoth" is a term which is meant to be applied to Goths, not Gothic Metal fans, but I'm afraid to bring it up on the talk page out of fear of retaliation.

The Gothic Metal mediation was asked for by me, against another user. The Gothic Metal article, also explains the term Faggoth. Now, the term is a bit of problem, as in how to go about best explaining it without offending anyone?

Now the way its used, and was coined, was as an insult against Gothic Metal, Symphonic Metal, and their variations. And also against music considered Goth Music. Now, how does saying that it includes something, which it does when its used as an insult, say it excludes something else? Also, it explains a previous misconception, in that due to the term Faggoth containing the word 'Goth', that Gothic Metal has connection to 'Goths' which it doesnt. Any suggestions on how to better this part of the article, if it offends, is welcome, as it is one of those trying things to write about, such as religion, abortion, or even the holocaust.

What would you like to change about that?

All I want from Leyasu is for him to stop making inflammatory or disrespectful comments towards me and the other editors of the Deathrock and Gothic Music articles, to and stop editing the Deathrock article unless he can actually cite sources instead of his opinion.

I will provide sources if needs be, but this article isnt my priority. Also, i got incited for claiming problems, when the first time i contacted the user was over a mistake in the article that made reference to Gothic Metal. Since then, the article has gone through heavy revision. Might i say, ive also stopped editing it, due to my Wikipedia priorties lying heavily elsewhere. Leyasu 17:43, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Comments by others

I had no association with the Death rock articles, but have been one of the parties involved with user (User:Leyasu) in the Gothic Metal article mentioned, and everything Jessica wrote above is true.

Recently, User:Leyasu "reported" me on the RfA board, falsely accusing me of harassing him and others. User:Leyasu is the one doing the harassing and false accusations, towards myself and editors from several different articles, as you will see here and User talk:Leyasu

A summary of User:Leyasu's conduct:

1. Adding unsourced, unverifable information to articles (or removing information), and refusing to provide sources (or providing sources that do not support the information provided.)

2. Rather than discussing, engaging in revert wars with other editors.

3. Adding frivolous VfD and Merge tags to articles.

4. Calling other users names, such as "ignorant", "meglomaniacal", and attempting to tarnish their reputation by saying they're putting "Vandalism", "POV", or "Bad Faith edits" into the article (when it is obviously the other way around.)

User:Leyasu also wrote this [1] in my talk page:

"im going to quite promptly tell you to go f--k yourself"

"then to be blunt, grow the f--k up"

FYI, he has been blocked twice and both admins/non-admins alike have abandoned trying to work or reason with him. I sincerely hope that Wikipedia's top officials put notice to his behavior and take the appropriate action against it. --Danteferno 23:38, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mediator response

Method of contact and Wikipedia username requested from Jessica; waiting on response. --NicholasTurnbull | (talk) 19:57, 16 January 2006 (UTC)