Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User conduct/Archive

This page is for archiving user conduct disputes listed on Wikipedia:Requests for comment. Archived disputes should not be added to. Disputes should be archived under any of the following circumstances:

1. If no additional complaints are registered for an extended period of time, and the dispute appears to have stopped.
2. The parties to the dispute agree.
3. The dispute proceeds to another method of dispute resolution, such as mediation or arbitration.

If the dispute is handled in mediation or arbitration, please make a note of where the dispute resolution process continued.

Archived disputes

• Newer entries towards the top
• This page only displays user RFCs from the most recent year and the current year, older discussions can be found in the archives, a search box is provided above
• As of March 25, 2013, the names of the certifiers are no longer a required field. You can find this information easily by clicking the link to the RFC itself.

Name	Start date	Description	Notes
Atsme	24 October 2014	Canvassing, Ownership of Articles, Battleground behavior	Closed due to lack of progress.
30 SW	26 August 2014	Copyright and sourcing issues	30 SW has not edited since just before the RFC was filed. RFC indefinitely suspended due to inactivity.
Dan56	July 29 2014	Copyright concerns, ownership of articles	several participants blocked as socks, Dan56 reminded of relevant policies
Worldedixor	11 September 2014	Worldedixor's problematic manner in handling disputes	Closed due to inactivity
Redrose64	15 October 2014	Page protection of template	Page protection level reduced, RFC closed per request of filer.
Middayexpress	22 August 2014	Alleged POV pushing, page ownership, cherry-picking of sources	Further discussion is recommended, possibly followed by a topic-ban request (at ANI) or arbitration if necessary.
24.0.133.234	11 March 2014	Inability for the IP to follow policy	Delisted for inactivity and very little comments, no edits since day 2 of RFC.
Scholarlyarticles	28 February 2014	Aggressive lack of understanding and violations of various Wikipedia policies	Involved and outside views; no response; closed due to inactivity. Uncertainty regarding whether subject retired from Wikipedia or not; recommendation to escalate dispute if issues persist in any case.
Arzel.2	11 January 2014	Issues	"Whitewashing" not firmly established, but likely NPA violations are.
QuackGuru2	26 January 2014	Overzealous in efforts to stamp out what they consider fringe	No clear consensus that user is disruptive in what is already a contentious area.
PrivateWiddle	15 February 2014	Dispute over user signatures	Nearly all comments occurred within a week of original complaint. Clear consensus was that the signature was not offensive
Colton Cosmic	9 February 2014	Request for unblock, sockpuppetry issues	Consensus is to leave the user blocked.
Oranjelo100	20 November 2013	Perform large numbers of edits, with relatively small amounts of actual changes to the articles and not using edit summaries.	Closed due to inactivity and low participation.
Joefromrandb	15 August 2013	Long-term incivility, personal attacks, and edit-warring	No conclusive outcomes, Wikipedia is not a battleground, edit warring is unconstructive
Baboon43	22 June 2013	Uncivil behavior, edit warring, and sock puppetry, mostly related to Islam topics	Discussion went stale after a few weeks, with Baboon43 refusing to participate, before the issue was taken to AN, resulting in an indefinite block.
Arzel	13 May 2013	Talk page and behavioral issues	Withdrawn after discussion on talk page of RfC/U
Folken de Fanel	30 April 2013	Problematic behaviour around AfDs and notability issues related to Dungeons & Dragons	There was consensus that Folken's approach needs to change. The closing admin suggested that he agree to a voluntary topic ban regarding deletion issues in the problem area.
Jax 0677	29 March 2013	Problematic creation of navboxes and other content	Some progress, later apparenrlty reversed. a proposal for a formal topic ban is anticipated
Will Beback	23 March 2013	To discuss whether Will should be allowed back to edit	No consensus to overturn Arbcom decision
CartoonDiablo	20 January 2013	Tendentious editing/POV issues	All participants other than the certifiers felt that this dispute was about content, not conduct
Apostle12	21 December 2012	Soapboxing, personal attacks, unreliable sources, canvassing	Closed due to inactivity

Name	Start date	Description	First two certifiers	Notes
Cantaloupe2	31 January 2013	Concerns about civility, battlegrounding, and related conduct issues	AndrewDressel, CorporateM	Serious and valid problems with Cantaloupe2's conduct exist. The matter might be taken up by ArbCom.
Epeefleche	15 January 2013	Removal of unsourced content from articles	Danjel, Graham87	Epeefleche is broadly correct to remove unsourced content, and Danjel has often acted wrongly in restoring unsourced content. Also, Danjel's conduct is widely seen as hounding.