Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Zivinbudas
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Zivinbudas is also involved in similar controversies on Vilnius and Lithuania. I beleive the Lithuania page is currently locked to keep him out. linas 23:11, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
- Yes, both Vilnius and Lithuania are locked after he was in revert wars there. But as I understand it, this RfC can only concern one issue, and that's his behavior at Indo-European languages. --Angr/comhrá 23:22, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
Since Vilnius is locked, Z has taken his POV pushing to Vilnius region. --Angr/comhrá 09:23, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
And Vilnius University, where he has violated 3RR again. Partitions of Poland and Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth are also locked to keep him out. --Angr/comhrá 11:41, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
- Since Zivinbudas is apparently not interested in any improvement of his behaviour, perhaps an ArbCom case would be in place? Halibutt 10:46, May 26, 2005 (UTC)
Good idea. I'm in favor. --Angr/탉 11:27, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
- Yes, I also support this. I mean, this sigle user has wasted hours of many constructive editors time and has forced us to protect several pages for close or over 3 weeks now. I unprotected Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth 3 days ago, tried to make it more POVed (since Zvin argued it was not a federation but a confedreration, so I explained in article that neither of this modern names are perfect) and had to protect it again because he reverts me to his 'confederation only' version. It is impossible to reason with him. Umm, how do we refer this to ArbCom? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 13:13, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
-
- Just go to Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration abd follow the template. 4 ArbCom members have to agree to hear the case. I'm not sure how effective it will be since when his account is blocked he just edits from a dynamic IP. Also it seems that the ArbCom wants nothing to do with content disputes so you're going to have to show that he is editing against consensus in a disruptive fashion. I have tried unblocking some of the pages blocked due to his edits, but he quickly returns. Good Luck. --nixie 13:56, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
I think we just go to Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee and follow the directions. The next step after an RfC is supposed to be mediation, but that's really for disputes between two users, and it presumes both parties are willing to talk (which Zivinbudas clearly isn't), so I think we're justified in skipping mediation and going straight to arbitration. --Angr/탉 14:02, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
- I've worried about the dynamic IP address too. I don't see any way he can be blocked long-term without blocking large numbers of innocent Lithuanians along with him. --Angr/탉 14:14, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
-
- Indeed, there is a risk of collateral damage. However, I have yet to see a contributor using the same IP range that would not be Z. Also, if a non-related user will be blocked, he'll have a chance to contact the administrators who might want to unblock him. I'd say there's no need to worry in advance, when the problem arises, we'll deal with it. Also, another user from that IP might apear in a year or so and there is a chance that Z. will already forget of WP by then. Halibutt 14:43, May 26, 2005 (UTC)
- Agreed. Lithuania is small, and so the pool of possible contributors is small as well. Whatever few edits those anons might have done, I am sure it is of less value then many hours of I, Halibutt, and you and scores of others users wasted dealing with this single vandal. Then there is also the edit potential wasted on articles we had to protect. Besides, the anon user can always register. It may be even possible to make a custom ban message - sth like 'this range has been blocked. Please register to edit'. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 17:41, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
- Indeed, there is a risk of collateral damage. However, I have yet to see a contributor using the same IP range that would not be Z. Also, if a non-related user will be blocked, he'll have a chance to contact the administrators who might want to unblock him. I'd say there's no need to worry in advance, when the problem arises, we'll deal with it. Also, another user from that IP might apear in a year or so and there is a chance that Z. will already forget of WP by then. Halibutt 14:43, May 26, 2005 (UTC)
We seem to be moving towards a concensus on confederation, could you guys take a look at please keep an open mind I think the proposal has merits. Mabye if we can sort out confederation others will get resolved too.--nixie 00:51, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
- I'm not in any way endorsing his behaviour in the past, but he seems a little more cooperative now--nixie 00:59, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
-
- Unfortunately not. Take a look at his recent 3RR violations (four articles in a day! quite an achievment I must say). Also, 90% (if not more) of his recent edit summaries begin with "rv", while only 3 begin with the word "Talk:". I doubt it is a big improvement. Halibutt 23:21, May 29, 2005 (UTC)
