Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Nirelan

In order to remain listed at Requests for comment, 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: 20:18, 8 February 2007 (UTC)), the page will be deleted. The current date and time is:, 29 July 2024 (UTC).



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

Statement of the dispute
Both Nirelan and the IP he uses when not logged in ( 70.104.126.193) have been vandalizing Dave Winer for two weeks.


 * On January 23, Nirelan taggged the article for speedy deletion as advertising spam--this was reverted:
 * After this first attempt was reverted, Nirelan tagged the article for deletion, claiming it was "based on information from a site with proven inaccuracies", a claim not borne out by the article's diverse history and authorship going back to 2002.
 * Nirelan made repeated attempts to remove entire sections of the article, for example
 * Instead of giving encyclopedia-quality sources to bolster his own claims, he deleted existing reference links.

After being warned about vandalism, Nirelan has attempted to disguise his attack on this page as a "content dispute." A look at some of the content he disputes by repeated reversions when other editors correct him, should make his POV clear:


 * Because Netscape created RSS .90, Nirelan demands to describe RSS 2.0 (created by Dave Winer) as "Netscape's RSS 2.0"
 * XML-RPC, created by Dave Winer in conjunction with Microsoft, must be referred to as "Microsoft's XML-RPC"
 * Repeated removal of well-established fact that Dave Winer was the first to implement the enclosure element in an RSS feed.
 * Repeated removal of "Relationship to the Public" section, most recently yesterday
 * Repeated removal of other well-supported material and of the reference info supporting it, for example yesterday

Two more warnings today on the IP's talk page: Nirelan has a fourth-level vandalism warning:. But Nirelan and 70.104.126.193 keep right on happily making un-useful POV edits to this article.

20:18, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Update


 * got a "final" vandal warning on Feb. 7.
 * Nirelan also uses and manually signs edits from, which got a "final" vandal warning on Feb. 8 and a later "edit war" threat also on Feb. 8.
 * Nirelan has now re-started that vandalism warning clock by making edits, which he also manually signs, using, which has not yet received any vandalism warnings despite having all its page edits reverted. 01:13, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Update #2 and his two sock-puppet IPs   and  were blocked from editing Wikipedia for 96 hours. Less than 12 hours after Ryulong blocked all three, Nirelan has registered yet another sockpuppet to continue vandalizing this article, betsythedevine 17:10, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

''This is a summary written by users who are concerned by this user's conduct. Users signing other sections ("Response" or "Outside views") should not edit the "Statement of the dispute" section.''

Desired outcome
Will somebody please stop "warning" Nirelan, who has been vandalizing this article for two weeks now, and finally actually block him from editing it? 20:50, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

-->

Description
''{Add summary here, but you must use the section below to certify or endorse it. Users who edit or endorse this summary should not edit the other summaries, other than to endorse them.}''

Evidence of disputed behavior
Here is the origin of the trouble, a comment war left by Nick Irelan on Dave Winer's blog on January 23

I would like Dave to admit that he did not create or play any part in the creation of RSS, blogging, outliners, or podcasting.

''Dave I have listed your wikipedia entry as an article proposed for deletion. You got an audience by implying that you either created or played an important role in the development of the technologies I listed. However, many people can show that you did not.''

''For example, today you implied that podcasting has some connection to Harvard when it clearly does not. You have been trying to tie yourself to that technology since Adam Curry invented it.''

And we see the resulting edits in Wikipedia:
 * Jan 23, tag for speedy delete
 * After that got reverted, tag for a different kind of speedy delete
 * Blanked the page several times, for example here
 * Continued to remove material in large quanitities today, after getting "final" warning about vandalism

betsythedevine 21:38, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

(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.)

Applicable policies and guidelines
{list the policies and guidelines that apply to the disputed conduct}


 * WP:NPOV
 * WP:V
 * WP:POINT

21:43, 8 February 2007 (UTC)



Evidence of trying and failing to resolve the dispute
(provide diffs and links)

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



Response
''This is a summary written by the user whose conduct is disputed, or by other users who think that the dispute is unjustified and that the above summary is biased or incomplete. Users signing other sections ("Statement of the dispute" and "Outside Views") should not edit the "Response" section.'' ''

{Add summary here, but you must use the endorsement section below to sign. Users who edit or endorse this summary should not edit the other summaries.}

Users who endorse this summary:

Outside view
''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. Users editing other sections ("Statement of the dispute" and "Response") should not edit the "Outside Views" section, except to endorse an outside view.''

{Add summary here, but you must use the endorsement section below to sign. Users who edit or endorse this summary should not edit the other summaries.}

Any reasonable reader, reviewing the history of this page in recent weeks, would conclude that Nirelan is eager to minimize Dave Winer's accomplishments, rather than to report them. If the page can be erased: good. If not, can entire sections be erased? If not, can each sentence in each section be erased? Can any other contributor be assigned credit? If so, all credit be assigned to the collaborator. The community has been more than patient with Nirelan, who is clearly willing to pay any price and expend as much of the community's time as possible, in order to accomplish an essentially negative result that clearly seems to be based in some personal grievance or grudge. MarkBernstein 15:23, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Users who endorse this summary:

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.

Both Nirelan and the IP he uses when not logged in ( 70.104.126.193) got vandalism final warning yesterday, but are still attacking and reverting Dave Winer

Sample activities
 * Because Netscape created RSS .90, Nirelan demands to describe RSS 2.0 (created by Dave Winer) as "Netscape's RSS 2.0"
 * XML-RPC, created by Dave Winer in conjunction with Microsoft, must be referred to as "Microsoft's XML-RPC"
 * Repeated removal of well-established fact that Dave Winer was the first to implement the enclosure element in an RSS feed.
 * Repeated removal of "Relationship to the Public" section, most recently yesterday
 * Repeated removal of other well-supported material and of the reference info supporting it, for example yesterday
 * Twice replaced the page with his demands, once added demands at the top of the page . (some diffs cited cover multiple edits, all edits covered are by Nirelan, with the first as the primary edit and the rest as typo correction)

Two more warnings today on the IP's talk page: Nirelan has a fourth-level vandalism warning:. But Nirelan and 70.104.126.193 keep right on happily making un-useful POV edits to this article.

My request--will somebody please stop "warning" Nirelan, who has been vandalizing this article for two weeks now, and finally actually block him from editing it?

20:18, 8 February 2007 (UTC)