Wikipedia:Requests for comment/ViperNerd

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: 07:14, 4 May 2009 (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
ViperNerd has prohibited constructive editing and application of POV checks by protecting peacock terms on the article for the University of South Carolina through ownership of the article. I have tried repeatedly to interact with ViperNerd to resolve this, along with several other editors, yet each instance has met with incivility and personal attacks from ViperNerd. All related articles can be found here: [|UserContribs:ViperNerd]. ViperNerd has been blocked several times for edit warring.

Desired outcome
I hope to see User:ViperNerd approach other editors with civility, as well as letting go of article ownership.

Description
See "Statement of the dispute" section

Evidence of disputed behavior

 * [] - There are multiple reverts exceeding 3RR, for which Viper was blocked, as well as removal of legitimate tags
 * User Talk:ViperNerd Viper also has removed discussion from his talk page, which I feel to be in violation of attempts to discuss and resolve disputes

Applicable policies and guidelines
{list the policies and guidelines that apply to the disputed conduct}
 * WP:CIVIL
 * WP:OWN
 * WP:PEACOCK
 * WP:COATRACK

Evidence of trying to resolve the dispute
(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.)
 * []
 * []

Evidence of failing to resolve the dispute
(Provide diffs to demonstrate that the disputed behavior continued after trying to resolve the dispute.)
 * []
 * []

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.}

Outside view by
Users who endorse this summary:

Outside view by
Users who endorse this summary:

Reminder to use the talk page for 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.