Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Chrisjnelson

The following discussion is an archived record of a

request for comment

. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

A summary of the debate may be found at the bottom of the page.

In order to remain listed at Wikipedia: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 ~~~~. If this does not happen within 48 hours of the creation of this dispute page (which was: 03:29, 13 August 2007 (UTC)), the page will be deleted. The current date and time is: 11:35, 25 June 2024 (UTC).

• Chrisjnelson (talk · contribs · logs)

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

There is a dispute that started at

• Chrisjnelson (talk · contribs) stop edit warring
• Chrisjnelson (talk · contribs) stop attacking people
• Chrisjnelson (talk · contribs) stop attempting to assert article ownership.
• Chrisjnelson (talk · contribs) to be more civil with other editors.
• WP:ADOPT

If non of the suggestions is acceptable, then I request that the user be removed from these discussions

• I would say that my biting could be said as having contributed to a state of unrest, but again, I will say that while I have biten back, it was not until all other methods seemed to be failing.
   ►Chat  22:29, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply
  ]

1. [1]
2. [2]
3. [3]
4. [4]
5. [5]
6. [6]
7. Template page Evidence there is extensive and easy to identify.
8. [7] Continued behavior of agitation was addressed by an uninvolved third-party.
9. [8] [9] [10] [11] User continues to harrass and make personal attacks and bites. All from a short period on a single talk page.
10. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Brett_Favre&diff=next&oldid=152791191, [12] edit warring and bullying others and again making statements that drift toward
    WP:OWN
11. [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18],[19],[20],all equate to violations of
    WP:CANVAS - please note "If you would be in favor of this edit, I'd ask you to kindly voice this at Template talk:Infobox NFLactive#Undrafted free agents
    ." made by Chrisjnelson.
12. [21] Accusing others of personal attacks when none took place.
13. [22] WP:STALK.

Applicable policies and guidelines

1. WP:NPA
2. WP:UNCIVIL
3. WP:BITE
4. WP:CON
5. WP:OWN
6. WP:NPOV
7. WP:AGF
8. WP:CANVAS
9. WP:STALK

Evidence of trying and failing to resolve the dispute

(provide diffs and links)

1. [23]
2. [24]
3. [25]
4. [26] - Warning on behavior following a personal attack.

Users certifying the basis for this dispute

{Users who tried and failed to resolve the dispute}

1.  ►Chat  03:14, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply
   ]
2. Morgan Wick 05:22, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. jddphd (talk · contribs) 23:38, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Other users who endorse this summary

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:

To put it shortly, this isn't a case where I can clearly say there's a "good guy" and a "bad guy". While I agree that Chrisjnelson's behavior has not been acceptable through this scenario, it takes two editors to make a fight, an edit war, or any of the other problems that have occurred between these two. It only takes one disengaging to stop it, and thus far, neither one has been willing to do so.

I hope that one or both editors will shortly choose to do so, or that these two can find a way to work civilly with one another rather than bickering and edit warring. The first step toward this will be both parties acknowledging and taking responsibility for their respective roles in this dispute, including

1. Yes. Navou ^banter 14:03, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Yes.
   talk/_contribs 23:13, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply
   ]
3. Yes, especially the personal accountability part, as there is a great deal of unconstructive animosity at this point. jddphd (talk · contribs) 23:37, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. Yes (with comment) - I don't agree with all of that - but the gist is right on. I have never questioned his GF and to my recollection - I THINK the closest I got to a PA was a bite. I might have attacked him, but I don't recall if i did.
    ►Chat  00:52, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply
   ]
5. Morgan Wick 01:33, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
6. Yes. --Cailil ^talk 14:19, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
7. Yes it takes two to tango and both need to compromise or both should take a break from this section which harbors the conflict.RMANCIL 18:25, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
8. Yes; it doesn't seem like either side is fully willing to step down and give the other space. It's my opinion that Jmfangio attacked Chrisjnelson in the sense that he falsely accused him of making personal attacks, which frustrated Chrisjnelson to a point where he ended up making personal attacks. A couple attempts have been made by both parties to try to have a calm discussion, but, as I said in the below summary, "if you don't say what [Jmfangio] wants to hear, [Jmfangio]'s not interested," which led to all this hostility. Ksy92003(talk) 03:40, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]