User:Snowspinner/Lir Arbcom

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

User:Lir has been a chronic "problem user" falling into the category of difficult users who seem to constantly try to push the limits of the rules and cause maximal disruption to Wikipedia without being banned. This presents some interesting issues in raising a case for arbitration against him, however I feel it is important to consider these issues, and I think that the case for action against Lir is a strong one.

He is regularly hostile and difficult in discussions, rejecting all attempts at consensus or discussion – examples of this can be found on Talk:Saddam Hussein, in which he has continued to insist on an article insertion despite clear consensus against it, as in - [1], [2], [3], [4] (In which he implicitly admits to edit warring), [5] (In which he rejects a compromise of a footer mention of his concern, because he wants it to be publicly noticed, as he explicitly states at [6]), [7], [8], [9], [10] (In which it appears that Lir uses another sockpuppet, User:YES), and [11], in which he explicitly refuses to avoid edit conflicts.

Another Lir conflict can be found on [12] (an old version of Talk:DNA, as seen at [13], [14], and [15], where he insists on a particularly cumbersome method of dispute resolution, to the objection of most of the participants on the talk page. There are other edits to this talk page consistent with the behavior discussed here found at [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], and [23].

Yet another can be found on Talk:List of academic disciplines), in which Lir attempts to insist that disciplines that are not considered "academic" by any normal usage of the term be included, as in [24], [25], [26], and [27]. (Note that User:Pizza Puzzle is another version of Lir, as evidenced by the linking to of his talk archives on User Talk:Lir.)

Furthermore, Lir was involved in supporting irismeister and Mr. Natural Health’s edit wars on Iridology, as seen at [28], specifically [29], [30], [31], [32], [33], [34], [35], [36], [37], [38]. [39], [40], and [41]. Note also [42], which is an archive of a VfD page in which, in addition to abusive comments towards User:Theresa knott, Lir voted on behalf of User:Irismeister while Irismeister was banned.

Lir was also responsible for the sockpuppet account User:Editing Saddam Hussein, which has been confirmed as coming from the same Qwest ISP and location that Lir uses to connect, has an affiliation with User:Plato/red faction, as Lir does, and has been used to make the same edits to Saddam Hussein as Lir has been making. Lir also continues to deny that the account was him, in the face of the clear evidence to the contrary. The vote in the RfA was abusive, as can be seen at [43]. Furthermore, Editing Saddam Hussein was used to violate the three revert rule on Saddam Hussein, as seen in [44], [45], [46], [47], and [48]. Note that some of these edits were from the IP address 63.230.159.235, which, as seen in his vote in the RfA, is the same user. He has continued this edit war with his User:Lir account as shown above.

Lir’s behavior in #wikipedia has been even more problematic, making statements like:

  • Lir: RickK is a sockpuppet
  • Lir: and Snowspinner is a lap dog
  • Lir: *arfarf*

and

  • Lir: ill fight rick if i ever meet him in real life

All of which appear to be personal attacks, and seem to be attempts to carry out aggressive behavior off of the Wikipedia proper so as to make his personal attacks without actually being blockable under Wikipedia guidelines. On a more minor note, Lir committed what appears to be an act of vandalism on User:Little Tin God Sysop when he created a userpage for this user that consisted only of “wtf,” as shown at [49], and has sought to, in the words of User:Plato on IRC, "ruin" users by nominating them for sysop status, as in this IRC snippet from Red Faction’s IRC channel, #RF.wikipedia:

  • Comrade_Nick: lir wanted to ruin you
  • Snowspinner: I imagine he still does. I think he'd have a tough time of it.
  • Comrade_Nick: he wanted to nomate you so no one will vote for you

All of this is compounded by Lir’s clear desire to disrupt the current function of Wikipedia, due to its supposedly being run by a "cabal," and due to its being, in his own words, "uberghey." He has made endorsements of trolling, such as his statement at [50] that "Trolling is not a valid reason to oppose sysophood." While it is entirely possible that this is not an endorsement of trolling, it's not plausible.

The latest instance of this attempted disruption is shown by Wikipedia:Sysop Accountability Policy, particularly in its original form [51], in which he suggests that the only two possible positions to take are that sysops who have blocked him in the past be desysopped, or that “Sysops are an elite cabal. They are above the law."

Note also that Lir has been previously banned, as in the message board thread [52]. Among the reasons for this ban, as expressed in these posts ([53] and [54]), were excessive use of pseudonyms. Note that, since his return, Lir has used User:Editing Saddam Hussein, as well as User:Ril, in violation of Jimbo’s concerns in [55]. Specifically, his conduct with the Editing Saddam Hussein username seems to violate Jimbo’s concern about when “someone takes on multiple identities in order to play games.” Other accounts that may well be sockpuppets of Lir include User:Little Tin God Sysop, User:Sad Ham, User:Random IRC quote, and User:IRC channels are private, though, of course, without IP evidence it's impossible to tell. (I would welcome sysop checks on all of these, of course, so that we can get a firmer list of Lir's sockpuppetry. If any of these are shown to be sockpuppets, I'll happily supply the evidence of their problem edits as well).

Mediation has not been attempted with this user to my knowledge, though I do not think this is a case where mediation would be helpful, since the issue here rather transcends any particular pair of users. There has been a lengthy RfC on the matter at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Lir, however.

In the end, though, I do not think the issue is one where attempts at compromise would be fruitful. Lir is a user who is clearly seeking to work within the rules of Wikipedia to disrupt it – much as one would expect from how he was classified by one of his Red Faction allies, User:JRR Trollkien in the listing of WikiHeirarchy, or by his endorsement of trolling. Personal attacks, I think, are personal attacks even if they happen on the (official) Wikipedia IRC channel, and he generally is in violation of the principles set up at Wikipedia:Wikiquette. More to the point, however, I think that Lir’s actions amount to a mildly subtle form of vandalism: his edits are mostly in bad faith, and are attempts to compromise the integrity of the encyclopedia. It could be argued that he falls under the category of “Trolls." However, on the vandalism page, a troll defined as one who is trying to attract flames. Lir is not trying to do that - he is trying to disrupt Wikipedia and waste users time fixing his edits and responding to his accusations. He fits the criteria of a vandal - he is seeking to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia.

To summarize, I am asking for an arbitration ruling not on the elusive question of the acceptability of banning trolls, but rather on the specific question of whether a pattern of bad-faith edits seemingly designed to damage the Wikipedia without specifically violating any policies (and thus making one a candidate for an easy sysop ban) constitutes vandalism, and is thus problematic. And, of course, on whether or not Lir’s behavior qualifies as such a pattern of behavior.