Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Luisosio

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In order to remain listed at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User conduct, at least two people need to show that they tried to resolve a dispute with this user and have failed. This must involve the same dispute with a single user, not different disputes or multiple users. The persons complaining must provide evidence of their efforts, and each of them must certify it by signing this page with ~~~~. If this does not happen within 48 hours of the creation of this dispute page (which was: 02:10, 1 October 2007 (UTC)), the page will be deleted. The current date and time is: 16:24, 13 June 2008 (UTC).

Luisosio (talk • contribs • logs)

Users should only edit one summary or view, other than to endorse.

1 Statement of the dispute
2 Response
3 Outside view
4 Discussion

[edit] Statement of the dispute

Recent activity on the articles Huei tlamahuiçoltica and Our Lady of Guadalupe has been problematic. One editor, Luisosio, has continually added original research and other unverifiable content to these articles, and rewritten the articles to meet his point of view. He continually accuses other editors of vandalism and labels them "meddlers".

[edit] Desired outcome

It is requested that Luisosio acknowledge that his contributions to date have violated policy, and that he agree to submit to all of the official policies of Wikipedia. If he is unable to understand how his contributions have violated policy, or is unable to comply with official policy in his future contributions, it is requested that he refrain from editing.

[edit] Description

His contributions have violated policy on multiple counts, as outlined in evidence below.

[edit] Evidence of disputed behavior

[edit] WP:CIVIL

He has shown little regard for other editors, making combative and abusive comments, and accusing other editors of acting in bad faith.

[1] "you are clearly on one side which is precisely why you have absolutly no right to erase anything!"
[2] "don't tell me you are not capable of finding a simple English word like proclaim in a dictionary?" ... "could eye glasses help out?" ...
[3] "You have have shown your intention of misleading our readers through childish arguments and the elimination of crucial evidence." ... "you are now exposed as an enemy of the enlightment of our Wiki readers"
Shouting. See User talk:Luisosio, Talk:Huei tlamahuiçoltica, Talk:Our Lady of Guadalupe, and many edit comments.

[edit] WP:OWN

Luisosio has asserted ownership of articles, citing his expertise.

[4] "Yes, you are vandalizing! I can see no reason for your erasing the comments of an expert in the field. This is supposed to be an encyclopeadia, not your toy."
[5] "please, consult before making mayor changes."
see also point 1 under WP:CIVIL above.
see also point 2 under WP:NPOV below.

[edit] WP:NOR

In addition to inserting his own opinions and presenting them as fact, Luisosio has continually referenced his own (self-published) work, and inserted links to his website.

[6] Insertion of references to self-published book, the suitability of which has been thoroughly discredited.
[7] Original research and improper synthesis (notes).
[8] insertion of his blog (many times)

[edit] WP:NPOV

Luisosio has inserted POV content, and unapologetically defends it as his right as a Catholic to do so.

[9] Insertion of POV content.
[10] "What you don't realize Katzam, is that this article is of interest mainly to Catholics! AND, that Catholics also have a right to their beliefs, in correct order, and to find this order of the Catholic mind and culture in this article!"
[11] "Judaism has been wrong for close to 2000 years: rabbis will be baptized on the strenghth of science alone!??? It's not a matter of guessing, just of adjusting attitudes to reality as we all agree to Monotheism."

[edit] WP:V

Luisosio has added unverifiable information (much of it the original research already cited above).

[12] "That as a Mexican I have access to sources beyond your reach including full mastery of the basic language which happens to be Spanish and my own!"

[edit] Applicable policies and guidelines

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

[edit] Users certifying the basis for this dispute

{Users who tried and failed to resolve the dispute}

Cleduc 02:21, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
--cjllw ʘ TALK 08:32, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
--Katsam 21:26, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Other users who endorse this summary

·Maunus· ·ƛ· 11:57, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Guldenat 16:54, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
Schicchi (talk) 05:21, 14 December 2007 (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.

{Add summary here, but you must use the endorsement section below to sign. Users who edit or endorse this summary should not edit the other summaries.}

Users who endorse this summary:

[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.