Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Duke53 2

In order to remain listed at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User conduct, 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: 09:56, 16 March 2009 (UTC)), the page will be deleted. The current date and time is: 15:06, 12 July 2024 (UTC).

---

• Duke53 (talk · contribs · logs)

---

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

This is a summary written by users who are concerned by this user's conduct. Only users who certify this request should edit the "Statement of the dispute" section.

Cause of concern[edit]

I bring this up as I have requested User:Duke53 remove statements linking my former username to his user page. I previously edited as User:Ebtunc2006. My account was used by roommates in bad faith and exercised a personal attack. I apologized to Duke53, yet Duke53 is insistent upon leaving this up on his user page despite my requests. I have tried various avenues to resolving this, and an administrator suggested an RfC. I use the old username for personal/professional correspondence and I do not want this to lead down the slippery slope to my personal information being revealed. I believe Duke53 is lacking in civility and not assuming good faith in his treatment towards other editors. This behavior has been a source of concern for Duke53 in the past with several other RfCs questioning general civility and tone. I intend to retire when this dispute is resolved. I simply wish to exercise my right to vanish. Thank you for your time. Hoopsphanatic (talk) 10:05, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Applicable policies and guidelines[edit]

List the policies and guidelines that apply to the disputed conduct.

Found here at User:Duke53 as well as User talk:Duke53

1. WP:VANISH
2. WP:CIVIL
3. WP:HARASS
4. WP:FAITH

This is not new behavior (prior RfC on Duke53) Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Duke53

Desired outcome[edit]

I would like to have the comments removed attributed to the username Ebtunc2006, as that is not a valid username, and it is a concern towards privacy issues. Hoopsphanatic (talk) 10:11, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have re-registered the former username to prevent it from being registered by anyone else and used for inappropriate means. This account will remain inactive and permanently retired from editing. Hoopsphanatic (talk) 03:11, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Statement by Alanyst[edit]

I am not entirely persuaded by Hoopsphanatic's account of who bears responsibility for the uncivil comments made under his previous account name over a year ago. I read his contribution history from Feb 2008 and my impression is of the account owner getting frustrated to the point of losing his cool and making comments he quickly came to regret but was unwilling to face the consequences for. The roommate scenario seems rather unlikely to me, though I cannot entirely discount the possibility.

I also think Hoopsphanatic's attempts to get this resolved have been irregular—certainly he should have tried approaching Duke53 directly at first to ask for the comments to be removed, and his attempts to get others' attention to this dispute have bordered on forum-shopping, in my opinion. Yet I think these errors can be accounted as the actions of one unfamiliar with WP dispute resolution processes.

Still, I am certifying the basis for this dispute because regardless of where the fault lay back then, and even if Hoopsphanatic is not being entirely forthright here, I see no good served by Duke53's insistence on retaining the comments on his user page. Conversely, if Hoopsphanatic's story is indeed true and he feels harmed by the association of those comments to his former username (which do appear in a Google search on the username, as I have verified), then that is a very good reason for the comments to be removed. Duke53 can certainly move whatever material he would like onto his own personal blog or website, but Wikipedia user pages should not be used to perpetuate grudges or to heap scorn on one's opponents. Such behavior is divisive and against the spirit of Wikipedia policies on civility. alanyst ^/talk/ 06:08, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To address a point. I was certainly frustrated with Duke53 during the editing process, and felt he was acting simply to antagonize. My roommates are all Carolina alums and noted my frustration in dealing with wikipedia on articles related to the North Carolina Tar Heels. They thought it would be "funny" to get on wikipedia and escalate the conflict. I will concede I should have approached Duke53 first, but I do not believe that would have resulted in anything being accomplished. I was not "forum shopping" - I was simply unaware of the dispute process. Hoopsphanatic (talk) 16:40, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Users certifying the basis for this dispute[edit]

Users who tried and failed to resolve the dispute.

1. alanyst ^/talk/ 05:37, 18 March 2009 (UTC). Attempt to resolve dispute: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5].[reply]

---

Additional users endorsing this cause for concern.

Questions
[edit]

Any users may post questions in this section.  Answers should be reserved for those certifying the dispute.

Q.

A.

Q.

A.

{This is a summary written by the user whose conduct is disputed.  Users not named in the request or certifying the request should post under Additional views below.}

Response to concerns[edit]

{Add summary here.}

Applicable policies and guidelines[edit]

List the policies and guidelines that apply to the response.

Users endorsing this response[edit]

Questions[edit]

Any users may post questions in this section.  Answers should be reserved for the user named in the dispute.

Q.

A.

Q.

A.

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.

Outside view by[edit]

{Enter summary here.}

Users who endorse this summary:

This section is for all users to propose solutions to resolve this dispute.  This section is not a vote and resolutions are not binding except as agreed to by involved parties.  

Template[edit]

1)

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Template[edit]

2)

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Template[edit]

3)

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

All signed comments and talk not related to an endorsement should be directed to this page's discussion page. Discussion should not be added below. Discussion should be posted on the talk page. Threaded replies to another user's vote, endorsement, evidence, response, or comment should be posted to the talk page.