Wikipedia:Requests for comment/75.47.x.x

In order to remain listed at 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 &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;. If this does not happen within 48 hours of the creation of this dispute page (which was: 02:39, 3 March 2008 (UTC)), the page will be deleted. The current date and time is:, 29 July 2024 (UTC).

It is important to note that there are other users editing from this IP range (75.47.0.0/16).

IPs in question:
 * , and others
 * , and others
 * , and others
 * , and others
 * , and others
 * , and others
 * , and others
 * , and others
 * , and others

Diffs linking the different IPs together:


 * : and
 * , : and
 * , : and
 * , : (note: the same person made a similar edit in between) and
 * , : and
 * , : and
 * , : and

User changes IP about once a day.

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. Only users who certify this request should edit the "Statement of the dispute" section.''

Cause of concern
''{Add summary here, 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.}''

Disruption
A user in the IP range 75.47.x.x has been editing articles about California highways for some time, at least since 2007-12-07. Has been edit warring.

Examples:
 * Golden State Freeway
 * California State Route 58
 * Interstate 15 in California
 * Interstate 210 and State Route 210 (California)
 * Template:Ladnav

Unresponsive to others' concerns; ignores messages on his/her talk page and often outright removes them (see, , , ). I had to threaten a block (for disruption) to get him to respond at all. Can be hostile. Makes bulk changes without discussion. Does not use article talk pages for discussion.

Removing others' talk page comments (user's own page not included): ,

Changing a redirect into the former article, making some edits, and reverting to the redirect for no apparent reason: ; refuses to explain why:

Vandalizing this RFC: and again:

July 2008

Harassment
After reverting an edit made by User:PhATxPnOY916, user reverts changes made by PhATxPnOY916 on several unrelated articles. Is asked to stop by PhATxPnOY916. 13 days later he does it again.

Attempts to resolve the dispute:
 * User:Evil saltine:, , , ,
 * User:Rschen7754:, ,

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


 * Disruptive editing
 * Harassment
 * Civility
 * Talk page guidelines

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.''

75.47.x.x becomes more responsive to questions and uses article talk pages as an alternative to reverting.

Users certifying the basis for this dispute
Users who tried and failed to resolve the dispute.


 * Evil saltine (talk) 04:52, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I have tried and failed to communicate. --NE2 05:16, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Rschen7754 (T C) 05:17, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * He deleted my comments from his talk page. RussNelson (talk) 03:54, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I've told him not to change a template on his talk page, he erased it with apparent understanding, only to revert for no reason a couple of days later. He's also been highly uncivil, calling multiple users "liars" - CL — 05:15, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Count me in too. He attacked me several times on his talk page after I blanked his abuse of helpmes and politely told him he was doing wrong. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 02:44, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

---

Additional users endorsing this cause for concern.


 * —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 05:16, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * —  master son T - C 12:52, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * -- Pre  ston  H  02:59, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * -- Admrb♉ltz (t • c • [ log]) 07:00, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Geniac (talk) 16:27, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

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

Q.

A.

Q.

A.

Response
''{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
{Add summary here.}

Applicable policies and guidelines
List the policies and guidelines that apply to the response.



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

Q.

A.

Q.

A.

Outside view by Scott5114
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.

I haven't been extremely involved with the 75 IP, but I definitely think that there's something that may need to be done with this user. 75 seems to try and make good-faith efforts to improve the encyclopedia, but their choice of contributions is so far off the mark that a lot of editors find the need to watch over the IPs to check to see if there's anything that needs to be cleaned up. Attempts to reach the IP are largely pointless, as the user has the tendency to merely revert anything posted to its talk page, using edit summaries such as "Just stay out of my way", "Just don't bother me, i have nothing to say" and "rm incivility" even when the posted discussion is by no means incivil. The user has also reverted others with edit summaries such as "IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE!!!!!!", "STOP THAT!", "I don't believe you! Why aren't you telling the truth?!", "Stop Being Fanatic!" , "Sorry, you are denied to submit your text; please avoid nonsense and lies from this moment".

The diffs presented above demonstrate, to me, a fundamental assumption of bad faith. Many of 75's edit summaries are incivil and could even be construed to contain personal attacks. Several users have attempted to reach out to this user and help guide them towards Wikipedia's accepted modes of conduct; however, the user has responded by either ignoring their input or outright belligerence. Numerous chances for reform have been extended to this user, but they have no intent to take those opportunities. Therefore, I believe that more drastic action may need to be taken against this user.

Users who endorse this summary:


 * —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 21:07, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Evil saltine (talk) 21:41, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Rschen7754 (T C) 22:51, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * RussNelson (talk) 04:13, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Seems he/she may be getting even worse than before . MSGJ (talk) 15:58, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
 * CL — 05:15, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Geniac (talk) 16:27, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * KelleyCook (talk) 16:32, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * --Splat5572 (talk) 03:00, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * You forgot about 75.47 has deep civil probelms at times. He often post edit summaries with slurs, Like FUCK YOU which is TOTAL UNACCEPTABLE summaries. I don't know if he even belong to Arisol's socks becasue Aristols has more civility than 75.47s. I can picture if he wasn an admin he would deelte stuff, lock pages, and block users in a abusive way, which is harmful to community. The other summaries I see is who cares or you joking which is not a good edit summaries.-- Freewayguy What's up? 17:17, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I think he got the "who cares" by imitating one of my summaries :) I wonder if he got the "fuck you" from you? --NE2 17:29, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * NE2, please don't curse; that's uncivil. --Splat5572 (talk) 02:59, 20 August 2008 (UTC)


 * He have called me a dickhead in the past, he does call me a liar.-- Freewayguy What's up? 17:55, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Technical input from User:Alison
Hi all. I was requested to weigh in on this RFC. Note that the range in question isn't quite as wide, but WHOIS shows it to be 75.47.128.0/17. Even still, checkuser indicates that there would be a massive level of collateral damage were this range to be softblocked or hardblocked - A l is o n  ❤ 07:55, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Proposed solutions
''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
1)


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Template
2)


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Template
3)


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Discussion
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.

What do they have in common?
Well, In March 75.47s was lying about Rschen7754 and try to trick me by posting garbage messages on my talkpage. The other times 75.47s harass 68 IPs, Splat5572, Dabby, AL2TB with sock tags. I don't what do they have in common.-- Freewayguy What's up? 23:10, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Ever since Scott blocked 75.47s IP for incivility for 2 mos which was fair enough he harasses, stocks, and lies about me on Commons about attacks which is like 2 month ago. I hadn't even made any unciil acts after the block, plus I left some users an apology,-- Freewayguy What's up? 23:41, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Many of them are tagged as being socks of User:Artisol2345 too. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 03:25, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * That's almost certainly not true; I don't even remember who first guessed that they may be the same, but they have different styles and a checkuser was unrelated. --NE2 03:50, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks for clearing that up then. I wasn't familiar with that user, just thought I'd toss that out. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 16:41, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * The idea that Artisol2345 may be the same as this editor was expressed at Suspected_sock_puppets/Artisol2345 (2nd). There is also a which contains a number of 75.47 editors. EdJohnston (talk) 18:36, 5 September 2008 (UTC)