User:Johntex/Arb

Involved parties


Case summary: Indefinite blocking of User:Rgulerdem by User:Cyde and User:NSLE (who acted with approval from WP:ANI). User:Johntex is appealing the block at the request of User:Rgulerdem.


 * Confirmation that all parties are aware of the request
 * (Provide diffs showing where parties other than the initiating parties have been informed about the request for arbitration.)

Johntex has posted to WP:ANI asking if there might be room for some leniency in this matter. This did not result in any change to the blocking. Johntex unprotected Rgulerdem's Talk page so that he could detail his positive contributions. This resulted in no change in heart by the blocking admins, and Rgulerdem was accused of continuing to be uncivil. Given the history between Rgulerdem and the blocking admins, I don't think continued discussion will help. NSLE has posted to Johntex that the next step should be to give the Arbitration Committee a chance to reveiw the situation.
 * Confirmation that other steps in dispute resolution have been tried

Statement by User:Johntex
I believe there is room for leniency in this case: I do believe that Rgulerdem has behaved badly in the past, but he has served his penalties for those actions. I agree he has tested the community's patience and caused many people to spend a lot of time on him. On the other hand, he has made some positive contributions. He has worked hard and in good faith on a proposed policy that is important to him. He has suffered insults and incivility on the parts of people who oppose his ideas. Most importantly to me, the "final warning" and "indefinite block" came about without a specific cause. I have no doubt the blocking admins feel Rgulerdem is a time-sink at best and a hazzard at worst. Also, there was little opposition to the block at WP:ANI. However, I wonder if readers at WP:ANI were able to hear both sides of the issue, since the user was blocked and had his page protected at least part of the time. I ask for the block to be reduced to
 * 1) Upon joining Wikipedia, Rgulerdem made good edits and engaged in good discussion., ,
 * 2) He got into trouble because about showing the cartoons at Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy: . Although he did made mistakes (Eg. 3RR violations), he also engaged in many attempts to help others understand how some people feel hurt by these images.
 * 3) He started on a proposed policy called Wikiethics. This has not been a popular proposal, and there has been incivility both by Rgulerdem and towards Rgulerdem.
 * 4) User:NicholasTurnbull gave Rgulerdem what he called a "final warning"  but he did not provide specific examples of problem behavior. patience.
 * 5) Rgulerdem questioned whether Wikipedia has a "final warning".
 * 6) User:NSLE gave a link to a policy that does not mention a final warning., so it did not answer Rgulerdem's question.
 * 7) User:NSLE protected Rgulerdem’s page with the statement that Rgulerdem was engaging in trolling and incivility on his talk page. I don’t agree these actions were trolling or uncivil.
 * 8) User:Cyde indefinitely blocked Rgulerdem, without providing any specific cause.
 * 9) Rgulerdem contacted me by e-mail and asked me to unblock him. I declined to remove theblock., but I did unprotect his talk page so that he could speak about his positive contributions.
 * 10) Rgulerdem provided information about his positive. Unfortunately, he also made complaints about those who have blocked him, although I had specifically asked him to “… not make any remarks which could possibly be construed as personal attacks, or which could possibly be seen as being uncivil..."   I do not think anything he said was a personal attack or uncivil, though he was argumentative when I had specifically asked him to stick to the positive.
 * 11) Rgulerdem then spoke directly to NSLE saying "Please note that, I am not editing here in Wiki based on your mercy. If I were you I would quit this threatening-style talks as it does not work.". At this point, NLSE re-protected the page.

Statement by party 2

 * (Please limit your statement to 500 words. Overlong statements may be removed without warning by clerks or arbitrators and replaced by much shorter summaries.)