Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Maddyfan

This discussion page is far more interesting than the original MC page. Maddyfan does seem to be a bit loopy. EM keep up the good work. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.155.1.245 (talk • contribs) 14:13, 18 June 2006.

Response to outside view of 200.142.202.140
The reason why I had blocked 66.68.254.78 (talk • contribs • [ page moves ] • block user • [ block log ]) was because he willfully tried to instigate arguments for his own enjoyment. In my view, that qualifies as disruption under the Wikipedia blocking policy. Once he found out about his block, he used 150.161.5.13 (talk • contribs • [ page moves ] • block user • [ block log ]), an open proxy, to vandalize my user talk page and try to impersonate me over at Talk:Christina Aguilera. . For that, I indefinetly blocked the open proxy as per Wikimedia's open proxy policy, as well as extended 66.68.254.78's block to a month for his use of the proxy. --LBMixPro&lt;Sp e ak 16:02, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Also in response to this outside view, I don't see why somebody has chosen to misrepresent the dispute like this as it's all there to see on the related discussion pages and in the edit history diffs provided. Also, I only notified users who were involved in the dispute that an RFC had been filed. Extraordinary Machine 12:22, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Time to block Maddyfan
I read about this whole situation in the New York Times, and read the entire progress of this unfortunate situation. I have made minor edits in the past to unrelated subjects on Wikipedia, and have no association with any of the people involved in this dispute. It is clear to me that Maddyfan has antagonized Extraordinary Machine from the beginning with flaming personal attacks, empty threats, obfuscation and outright lies, apparently in order to keep her fawning and poorly written Christina Aguilera article free from any improvements. EM on the other hand, has been by the book and above-board the whole way. I cannot find one instance where he has stooped to her level. Now I see that Maddyfan has accused everyone who has agreed with EM of being his proxy. Let's please wind this up and block this user before she creates any more havoc. This wonderful experiment in collective knowlege is far too important to be disrupted by people who simply seek to sow discord.Crisbastap 23:19, 19 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Here's the relevant link: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/17/technology/17wiki.html?_r=1&oref=slogin -- getcrunk    &#63;   23:54, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
 * A checkuser revealed that Xtinamoline is Maddyfan, and Xtinamoline has been blocked indefinetly. --LBMixPro&lt;Sp e ak 01:02, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Good Riddance!Crisbastap 00:16, 21 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't want Maddyfan to be banned from editing; I just want her to acknowledge that her behaviour during this dispute was inappropriate and not have her attempt to strong-arm other editors out of articles in the future. Also, I think the Aguilera article is one of the more NPOV and well-written articles on comtemporary pop musicians out there. Extraordinary Machine 12:22, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
 * The same here. But with sockpuppet account indef blocked, Maddyfan's IP could be autoblocked as well, and that requires an admin with autoblock knowlege to get passed. If Maddyfan's caught in an autoblock because of the other account, then she should ask us to unblock it. --LBMixPro&lt;Sp e ak 21:50, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Maddyfan editing from her IP address
It appears that Maddyfan is still editing Wikipedia from her IP address; see Special:Contributions/68.46.186.126. She's been asked (both on her IP's talk page and her username's) to submit a response to this RFC or discuss it, but she hasn't yet done so. Is there anything that can be done about this? Extraordinary Machine 12:22, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Umm... usually failed RfCs go straight to the Arbitration Commitee, but they're so busy as it is and if they feel it's a content dispute, they won't accept it. Another thing to do is to report it at the admin's noticeboard and see what other admins could do. But responses there are sparse because they're other problems going on. Knowing this edit war gave bad publicity for Wikipedia, I can assume they'll do something. --LBMixPro&lt;Sp e ak 21:57, 29 June 2006 (UTC)