User:UBeR/Contravention

This page shall be used for the sole purpose of gathering edit diffs (and a small explanation of each), possibly to be used in an RFC of a sort.

The disputed

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: 22:57, 26 March 2007 (UTC)), the page will be deleted. The current date and time is: 03:38, 29 June 2024 (UTC).

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

Statement of the dispute

This is a summary written by users who are concerned by this user's conduct. Users signing other sections ("Response" or "Outside views") should not edit the "Statement of the dispute" section.

Countless and continuous violations of: WP:NPOV, in that the user inserts non-neutral material knowingly for no other purpose than to advance a particular POV; WP:DE, in that the user makes edits to articles that disrupt the effective flow of editing to that article, retarding the progress of said article; WP:NPA, in that the user attacks the editor, rather than commenting on the edits; WP:OR, in that the user inserts original research knowingly; WP:V, in that the user chooses to ignore the policies on verifiability; WP:CIVIL, in that the user engaged in incivil behavior; WP:OWN, in that the user wishes to own various articles and talk pages; WP:VANDAL, in that the user inappropriately deletes bona fide tags and templates for unwarranted and unmerited reasons; and WP:AGF, in that the user fails to assume good faith of the editors contributing to Wikipedia. ~ UBeR 23:16, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Desired outcome

This is a summary written by users who have initiated the request for comment. It should spell out exactly what the changes they'd like to see in the user, or what questions of behavior should be the focus.

Given the severity and longevity of the affairs we have the desire for user to recognize their mistakes and breaches of policies; the desire for user to gracefully abscond from their current position within the Wikipedia community; the desire for user to apologize to the aggrieved; the desire for user to disengage from editing in climate change related articles for a period no shorter than six months; and the desire for user to undergo edit parole for a period no shorter than 365 days. ~ UBeR 00:15, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Description

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

Evidence of disputed behavior

(Provide diffs. Links to entire articles aren't helpful unless the editor created the entire article. Edit histories also aren't helpful as they change as new edits are performed.)

Applicable policies and guidelines

{list the policies and guidelines that apply to the disputed conduct}

Evidence of trying and failing to resolve the dispute

(provide diffs and links)

[1]
[2]

Users certifying the basis for this dispute

{Users who tried and failed to resolve the dispute}

Other users who endorse this summary

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:

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.