Wikipedia:Association of Members' Advocates/Requests/March 2007/Rashaun

Case Filed On: 23:46, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedian filing request:

• Rashaun (talk · contribs)

Other Wikipedians this pertains to:

• Jyre (talk · contribs)
• SiahZendik (talk · contribs)
• various IPs

Wikipedia pages this pertains to:

• Zendik_farm (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Talk:Zendik_farm (edit | [[Talk:Talk:Zendik_farm|talk]] | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• [[Jyre talk:{{{2}}}]] ([{{fullurl:Jyre talk:{{{2}}}|action=edit}} edit] | [[:Jyre:{{{2}}}|jyre]] | [{{fullurl:Jyre talk:{{{2}}}|action=history}} history] | [{{fullurl:Special:Whatlinkshere/Jyre talk:{{{2}}}}} links] | [{{fullurl:Jyre talk:{{{2}}}|action=watch}} watch] | logs)
• [[Rashaun talk:{{{2}}}]] ([{{fullurl:Rashaun talk:{{{2}}}|action=edit}} edit] | [[:Rashaun:{{{2}}}|rashaun]] | [{{fullurl:Rashaun talk:{{{2}}}|action=history}} history] | [{{fullurl:Special:Whatlinkshere/Rashaun talk:{{{2}}}}} links] | [{{fullurl:Rashaun talk:{{{2}}}|action=watch}} watch] | logs)

Have you read the

?

• Answer: TLDR

Joking. Yes, I did. Most of it, anyways. Am I disqualified now?

How would you describe the nature of this dispute? (policy violation, content dispute, personal attack, other)

• Answer: Content dispute that began over policy violations and has evolved into personal attacks. Ha. Basically, I want to include "Criticisms of Zendik Farm" and "cult allegations" on the Zendik_farm wiki and other editors, who happen to current and former Zendiks as well as Zendik sympathizers, don't want the sections there. Jyre specifically is essentially vandalizing the page by blanking huge sections of it and simplifying paragraphs into one sentence. For example, a huge paragraph detailing sexual harrassment and a former member being essentially robbed (both from the Washington Post and the Washington City Paper, which are fine sources) got simplified into "such-and-such visited the farm briefly in 2003 and wrote an article about it." I am currently the only editor of the page who isn't a former Zendik, Zendik sympathizer, or current Zendik, and it's been very difficult to stand my ground with two editors and a shit-ton of IPs attacking any and every little thing I do. Any mistake I make, such as thinking that one person was vandalizing from various IPs instead of it being this shitload of Zendik groupies in Austin, TX, who are doing the vandalizing, gets a whole entry on the talk page. I make the mistake of asking people to put new entries at the top of the pages instead of the bottom and that gets an entire dis from SiahZendik. Basically, I have no one to help me counter their attacks and uphold the integrity of the page. Both SiahZendik and Jyre are new to Wikipedia and they're just fucking hardheaded and overly passionate. They were attacking my person weeks ago, and though I've made no personal attacks, I have been reduced to refusing to engage in discourse. I've been called an asshole, told to kiss someone's virtual ass, etc etc etc and I haven't made any such comments to them. Well, I recently told someone to light a candle for Wulf's dusty ass right before crying me a river of pearl necklaces, but that's different from "you're a rude asshole." Basically, they've debated me into not giving a fuck about their position or desires.

What methods of

have you tried so far? If you can, please provide wikilinks so that the Advocate looking over this case can see what you have done.

• Answer: I kept away from the site for over a week, only to come back and find the page fucking massacred. Talking about it was the first thing we tried, but that's just escalated into namecalling and bullshit that I don't care for. I've tried getting the page protected and reporting Jyre to admins but they don't give a shit.

What do you expect to get from

?

• Answer: Someone else to take this abuse. Haha. In seriousness, I just feel overwhelmed being the only person that's advocating my side - my side being that Zendik Farm is America's most subtle cult and people need to be protected from it. I'd be happy to include positive info on the "commune" if they actually did anything besides sell crap to teenagers and spread herpes amongst their membership. Snarkiness aside, these people don't do shit. They sit in the mountains and hide from the DEATHKULTUR, as they call it, and that's it. There is no wikiworthy positive info to add about Zendik Farm that isn't NPOV or isn't already on the page, basically. It's obvious in my interactions with its members and ex-members that these people are too fucking crazy to be fair in their editing or even in their discussion of the wiki. Most importantly, I really just need someone to back me up on the talk page. They're killin' me!

Other editors at Zendik_farm are current Zendiks, former Zendiks and Zendik groupies, and they lack a neutral point of view. I don't think mine is 100% neutral either, but I'm not blinded by so much propaganda like they are. Basically, they are blanking entire sections of the article and adding things that violate Wikipedia guidelines. When I call them out on this, they accuse me of outright hating Zendik and flat-out working against them. It's not true, plain and simple. Their edits are improper, not scholarly, not NPOV, and often contain unsourced or poorly sourced information. Sometimes their edits are downright libelous, such as "Brandon Blatzoff suffers from delusions of grandeur" and "the entire city of Austin, TX, believes that Wulf Zendik invented rollerblades." Right now I'm the only active editor who is not a member of Zendik, a former Zendik, or a Zendik sympathizer. According to them, anyone who doesn't love Zendik hates Zendiks.

When the case is finished, please take a minute to fill out the following survey:

Did you find the Advocacy process useful?

• Answer:

Did your Advocate handle your case in an appropriate manner?

• Answer:

On a scale of 1 (worst) to 5 (best), how polite was your Advocate?

• Answer:

On a scale of 1 to 5, how effective do you feel your Advocate was in solving the problem?

• Answer:

On a scale of 1 to 5, how effective do you feel the Advocacy process is altogether?

• Answer:

If there were one thing that you would like to see different in the Advocacy process, what would it be?

• Answer:

If you were to deal with this dispute again, what would you do differently, if anything?

• Answer:

Case Status: NEW

Advocate Status:

• None assigned.