User talk:ThePromenader/sandbox rfc

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Preparation 2 Statement of the dispute 2.1 Description 2.2 Evidence of disputed behavior 2.2.1 Manipulative behaviour 2.2.2 Reverting (most notable): 2.2.2.1 Introduction: 2.2.2.2 Area, Density, Temperatures 2.2.2.3 Density 2.2.2.4 Population 2.2.2.5 Economy 2.2.2.6 Name 2.2.2.7 Name - Metropolitan area is Francilien 2.2.2.8 List of Paris Mayors 2.2.2.9 Population Growth 2.2.2.10 Fictitious Populaation figures 2.2.2.11 Re-adding "bigger than" GDP 2.2.2.12 Paris outside city limits 2.2.2.13 Paris pop - London GDP tug o' war 2.2.2.14 My intro rewrite 2.2.2.15 Economy reinstatement (former texts) 2.2.2.16 remove Paris city info under cover of "revert "london" vandalism 2.2.2.17 Metropolitan intro? 2.2.2.18 Infobox 2.2.2.19 Economy-tug o'war: 2.2.2.20 Introduction: 2.2.2.21 Introduction: 2.3 Applicable policies 2.4 Evidence of trying and failing to resolve the dispute 2.5 Users certifying the basis for this dispute 2.6 Other users who endorse this summary 3 Response 4 Outside view

[edit] Preparation

I've managed to find all the original "protected" always reverted to by the contributor in question, but have yet to chase down all the revert diffs. What's here concerns only the Paris page - I have yet to add the sockpuppetry (I'm now convinced) and WP:OR on Economy of Paris, the WP:OR on Demographics of Paris, plus the antics around the latest "tallest structures" escapade, namely the obvious bad faith, manipulative behaviour and baseless and disruptive complaints to admins. THEPROMENADER 10:23, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

PS: Feel free to add/organise anything you want. THEPROMENADER 10:24, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

For a complete archive of all talk-page messages concerning the below removed from Hardouin's talk page, please see here.

[edit] Statement of the dispute

[edit] Description

Page/edit protectionism, especially in all things Paris. For the longest time I did my best to assume that this contributor's edits were in Good Faith, but through experience and resulting evidence I have found it increasingly difficult to do so. This contributor is a vehement protector of any contribution of his own, especially if it reflects his own opinons or Original Research. The basic means of protection is wholesale reverting, and a total ignorance of the WP:3RR rule. Even if he doesn't revert, this contributor will, only a short time any alterations made to his texts, will always "edit over" these changes. This user also refuses to engage in any pre-emptive discussion of any change, yet should any discussion result in change, he will not hesitate to revert it outright. Should he be faced with question/opposition about the validity of his revert/edits, this contributor will ignore all references, provide none, and fill a talk page with a fog of personal comparative theories and anything else non-factual. If pressured to provide at least some sort of reference, this contributor will only provide a selective panopoly of sometimes dubious and irrelevent citations 'justifying' the reverted-to original, but nothing in the goal of clarifying the actual fact of the matter. Should he be faced with consensus, he will not hesitate to use sock-puppetry to try to overcome it. Any failure to maintain his edits results in name-calling, manipulative and baseless accusations, unfounded complaints on third-party talk pages, and means at all to game the system to the limit. Should the contributions of another constantly impede on his own, all the above gets 'personal' and targeted. Recent events have been fallacious complaints to administrators and a blanking of any rebuttal to this on his talk page - in fact, this contributor has blanked every message I have ever left on his talk page. In short, this contributor's behaviour is incivil, disruptive and corrupts the editing process.

[edit] Evidence of disputed behavior

[edit] Manipulative behaviour

Ignoring attempts at pre-emptive discussion[1]. When change announced, warning that any change would be reverted by "other editors"[2]. I suggest a reading of the entire talk page at this point - especially the end - for evidence of my own attempts at pre-emptive discussion and the lengthy wait (I was told to make) for an inexistant consensus - as the page then had only one major contributor: the same giving the 'don't touch it' warnings.

[edit] Reverting (most notable):

Please be reminded that at first I had no idea why this contributor was reverting: it was only with time that I found that he had in fact rewritten almost the entire page and was protecting his own edits. At the time it was simply frustrating to have (sometimes) one hour of work effaced with a single pompous click. It took quite some research, but I have managed to find the original texts at the time of their contribution - this way the what and why of what's being reverted is quite clear.

Original contribution: Modification:[3] Revert:

[edit] Introduction:

• Original contribution: [4] - + "greater Paris metropolitan area" concept.

[edit] Area, Density, Temperatures

• Original: [5], Mod: [6]

[edit] Density

• Original: [7]

[edit] Population

• Original: [8] - + Metropolitan area, none on city, nonexistent London MA

[edit] Economy

• Original: [9]
• [10] revert + added comparisons

[edit] Name

[11]

[edit] Name - Metropolitan area is Francilien

[12]

[edit] List of Paris Mayors

• Original: [13] - "Provost shot, Mayor elected".

[edit] Population Growth

• [14] - protecting "museeeification"

[edit] Fictitious Populaation figures

• MA map: [15] - "2005" figures

[edit] Re-adding "bigger than" GDP

• [16]

[edit] Paris outside city limits

[17]

[edit] Paris pop - London GDP tug o' war

• [18] [19]M:[20]R:[21] M: [22] Anon Push: [23] R:[24] Anon Push: [25] R: [26] Anon Push: [27] R: [28] Anon Push: [29] R (as anon): [30] Anon Push: [31] R: [32] Anon Push: [33] R: [34] Anon Push: [35] R (as anon) : [36] Anon Push: [37] R (as anon) : [38] My Economy edit (good one): [39] Anon Push: [40] My edits: [41] [42] [43] [44] [45] [46] [47] Wholesale revert: [48] Josefu revert back: [49] R:[50] Revert back: [51] H Revert: [52] Josefu revert back: [53] Edit: [54] H Revert: [55] Anon Push: [56] H Revert: [57] Anon Push: [58]

[edit] My intro rewrite

My rewrite: [59] H revert: [60] TP revert back: [61] H revert: [62] TP revert back: [63] H revert: [64] Anon Push: [65] (few days later) TP revert back: [66] H revert: [67] TP revert back: [68] H revert back: [69] TP revert back: [70]

[edit] Economy reinstatement (former texts)

• Reinstatement of former texts under cover as "as per discusssion" of another subject: [71]

[edit] remove Paris city info under cover of "revert "london" vandalism

• [72] Revert [73] Push: [74] REvert: [75] Push:[76] My mod: [77] Hardouin first wholesale revert past both: [78] I reinstate:[79] Re-revert:[80] Reinstate: [81] Revert

[edit] Metropolitan intro?

• - [82] - "historic centre, train network"

[edit] Infobox

Original: [83], mod: [84]

[edit] Economy-tug o'war:

My rewrite: [85] H revert:[86] TP reinstate: [87] H revert:[88]

Original contribution: [89]

[edit] Introduction:

Original contribution: [90]

[edit] Introduction:

Original contribution: [91]

For a good summary of how editing went, please review this part of the page history. I know it changes.
Economy section, complained about on Talk page, rewritten:

• Original: [92] Edit:[93] Revert:[94], reverted four times afterwards without changing a single word.

Introduction:

• Original: [95] Edit:[96] Revert:[97] - Reverted seven times following.

Administration:

• Original: [98] 1st stomp: [99] Correction: [100] Before Revert: [101] Revert: [102] - reverted twice after

History:

• Long rewrite, disapproved, second rewrite, stomp.

Area, Economy, Size, References

• Original:[103] Edit: [104] Revert:[105] Second edits (ThePromenader, El_C: [106]Second Revert:[107] - Edit war, 6 reverts. Did not change false references: figures of Hardouin's own calculation linked to real statistics for another region entirely.

Because of dispute, fictitious content, unanswered talk page arguments and constant reverts, installed "Totally Disputed" tag. Although he refuses to engage in any dialogue or answer any Talk Page questions and demands for references, tag removed by Hardouin sometimes several times daily.

Area:

• Original: [108] Edit: (User:Green Giant) [109] Revert: [110] - reverted six times by Hardouin, Three times by ThePromenader, twice by User:Green Giant. Partially reverted over several days by Hardouin.

Introduction:

• Original: [111] Edit:[112] Revert: [113], and successively seven times reverted by Hardouin, almost as many by myself and twice by Green Giant.

Misc. Economy, Size, Population Growth:

• Original:[114] Final Edit: [115] Revert: [116], five times afterwards - correction reinstated four times by myself, once by Green Giant

Misc.:

• Original (last edit:Hardouin): [117] Last Edit (myself and 4 users): [118] Revert: [119] Second 'improving style' Revert [120] - plus five others until Green Giant stepped in [121], but then Hardouin Reverts yet again masked under superfluous comment [122]. Since reverted-to statistical numbers are false and have been proven so many times, I re-install former corrections yet again [123]. Since edit was re-installed in haste (and high temper), I edit once again (after two other users) once calmed down[124]. Hardouin returns yet again to re-insert introduction greatly resembling his own... from over a year before. Fictitious statistic present once again. I blow up. Revert war. Ban for both Hardouin and I, page blocked.

One month later.
Introduction:

• Edit: [125] Revert: [126] - note - Hardouin reverts to text of her own dating from months before, in one fell swoop anuls months of edits from several contributors - and this in total disregard of factual accuracy and consensus. In the bargain Hardouin tries to mask the revert under an "installing standard infobox" comment.

Infobox.
The former infobox, a creation of Hardouin's it turned out, was a template used in only one article. Several contributors suggested making one for all major French cities, and taking the opportunity to improve the design/function of that existing. Hardouin chose not to participate in the discussion, but instead made a template for all French articles - resembling exactly the template already existing. The above comment was the same contributor installing his work in total ignorance of all ongoing discussion and existing consensus. Consensus eventually did win, but in the weeks following, Hardouin used every excuse possible to revert the infobox to his own on at least three revert-war occasions.

Misc:

• Two days later, another attempt at correction and removing pompous phrase axed by several months before [127]... followed by a rearrangement of the by now very clunky cut and paste introduction [128]. Other Edits: [129] Revert: [130] under a "you're the reverter" commentary.

Introduction:

• Attempting again to shorten sentence, needless detail and remove dubious reference already decided against on talk page [131] [132] Revert: first by Metropolitan [133], then by - of course - Hardouin [134].

Questions on abusive Reverts:

• User:Stevage: User_talk:Hardouin#Reverts to Paris

Calls to order on Factual accuracy:

• Misuse of statistical terms - User:Thbz [135]

Attempts to reason:

• Most are from archives - Hardouin simply effaces any message from myself from her talk page.

User_talk:Hardouin#Paris Disinformation User_talk:Hardouin#Paris research User_talk:Hardouin#Removed "Disputed" tag. User_talk:Hardouin#Minor Paris Edit, infobox

Debunked (yet reverted-to) theories:

Sock-puppetry ...Half Moon Bay

[edit] Applicable policies

• WP:OWN, WP:CIVIL, WP:NOT, WP:POV, WP:VERIFY, WP:OR, WP:POINT, WP:CITE, WP:3RR...

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

[edit] Users certifying the basis for this dispute

(sign with ~~~~)

[edit] Other users who endorse this summary

(sign with ~~~~)

[edit] Response

Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~~~~):

[edit] Outside view

Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~~~~):