| Revision as of 14:30, 15 February 2010 editMiszaBot III (talk | contribs)597,462 editsm Archiving 1 thread(s) (older than 5d) to User talk:Hiding/Archive 2010.← Previous edit | Revision as of 23:37, 16 February 2010 edit undoRadiopathy (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users18,609 edits →User:Koavf: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 39: | Line 39: | ||
| {{Talkback|Eusebeus}} | {{Talkback|Eusebeus}} | ||
| == User:Koavf == | |||
| Hello, | |||
| A few months ago, you were involved in for making mass catagory changes without seeking consensus as part of a ]. While the circumstances have changed, this user continues a disruptive editing pattern. His rationale is always that a particular template "demands" or "explicitly calls for" whatever changes he is making, and he interprets any attempt at first reaching consensus as rude and uncivil. | |||
| Recently he edit warred at ], , . , and was told very solidly ] to first get consensus for such a radical change to a well established article. | |||
| Secondly, the user seems to have a fascination with endashes and emdashes, and has edit warred over this on several occasions: He , was , and finally relented when consensus was reached and the admin undid his reversion. He recently did some "spite editing" (. , , , in response to my comment at the Remain in Light talk page ("''User:Koavf has a long history of rigidly adhering to template guidelines to the point of disruption, and should simply be reverted and ignored; if he edit wars, take it to AN/I.''"). I left a note ], and ] was predictable. If you'll look at a few of the preceding post to his talk, you'll see that the pattern continues. | |||
| Further, he can't be made to understand that it's not always appropriate to include "UK" or "United Kingdom" in infoboxes at articles about UK subjects. The long standing convention has been to include town, county and constituent country (England, Wales, etc.), but not "UK or "United Kingdom", just as one should not presume a UK citizen's "nationality" without a reliable source (as dicussed at ]). | |||
| He also undid the formatting of '''ALL''' of the infoboxes at all of Beatles' record articles where a lot of time was spent sorting out the clutter of multiple studios and session dates just so he could tag "England, United Kingdom" onto all of the studio locations, citing "Template:Album Infobox", which, of course has '''no''' guidline regarding the country or nation where the record was made (eg, , ). | |||
| It's unfortunate that someone with the eagerness and ability to contribute can be so disruptive. I'm asking you to take a closer look at the circumstances and see if more restrictive sanctions aren't appropriate. | |||
Revision as of 23:37, 16 February 2010
 | This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.User:Hiding is having computer issues which should be resolved sooner rather than later. |
| This talk page is automatically archived by Miszabot. Any sections older than 5 days are automatically archived to User_talk:Hiding/Archive 2025. Sections without timestamps are not archived. |
Help with dermatology-related content
I am looking for more help at the dermatology task force, particularly with our new Bolognia push 2009!, history of dermatology, or list of dermatologists pages? Perhaps you would you be able to help us? I could send you the login information for the Bolognia push if you are interested? ---
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Reply
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
User:Koavf
Hello,
A few months ago, you were involved in topic banning User:Koavf for making mass catagory changes without seeking consensus as part of a community sanction. While the circumstances have changed, this user continues a disruptive editing pattern. His rationale is always that a particular template "demands" or "explicitly calls for" whatever changes he is making, and he interprets any attempt at first reaching consensus as rude and uncivil.
Recently he edit warred at Remain in Light, , . , and was told very solidly on the talk page to first get consensus for such a radical change to a well established article.
Secondly, the user seems to have a fascination with endashes and emdashes, and has edit warred over this on several occasions: He moved an article without consensus, was reverted by an admin, reverted this admin without reaching consensus and finally relented when consensus was reached and the admin undid his reversion. He recently did some "spite editing" (. , , , in response to my comment at the Remain in Light talk page ("User:Koavf has a long history of rigidly adhering to template guidelines to the point of disruption, and should simply be reverted and ignored; if he edit wars, take it to AN/I."). I left a note on his talk page, and the response was predictable. If you'll look at a few of the preceding post to his talk, you'll see that the pattern continues.
Further, he can't be made to understand that it's not always appropriate to include "UK" or "United Kingdom" in infoboxes at articles about UK subjects. The long standing convention has been to include town, county and constituent country (England, Wales, etc.), but not "UK or "United Kingdom", just as one should not presume a UK citizen's "nationality" without a reliable source (as dicussed at WP:UKNATIONALS).
He also undid the formatting of ALL of the infoboxes at all of Beatles' record articles where a lot of time was spent sorting out the clutter of multiple studios and session dates just so he could tag "England, United Kingdom" onto all of the studio locations, citing "Template:Album Infobox", which, of course has no guidline regarding the country or nation where the record was made (eg, , ).
It's unfortunate that someone with the eagerness and ability to contribute can be so disruptive. I'm asking you to take a closer look at the circumstances and see if more restrictive sanctions aren't appropriate.